u.s. customs and border protection · 2020. 1. 8. · the buzz group llc (buzz group), u.s. customs...

U.S. Customs and Border Protection◆

19 CFR PART 177

MODIFICATION OF ONE RULING LETTER ANDREVOCATION OF TREATMENT RELATING TO THE

TARIFF CLASSIFICATION OF PLASTIC STETHOSCOPECOVERS

AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department ofHomeland Security.

ACTION: Notice of modification of one ruling letter and revocationof treatment relating to the tariff classification of plastic stethoscopecovers.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 625(c), Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C.§ 1625(c)), as amended by section 623 of title VI (Customs Modern-ization) of the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementa-tion Act (Pub. L. 103–182, 107 Stat. 2057), this notice advises inter-ested parties that U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) ismodifying one ruling letter concerning the tariff classification of plas-tic stethoscope covers under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of theUnited States (HTSUS). Similarly, CBP is revoking any treatmentpreviously accorded by CBP to substantially identical transactions.Notice of the proposed action was published in the Customs Bulletin,Vol. 53, No. 39, on October 30, 2019. No comments were received inresponse to that notice.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This action is effective for merchandiseentered or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption on or afterMarch 2, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: SuzanneKingsbury, Electronics, Machinery, Automotive and InternationalNomenclature Branch, Regulations and Rulings, Office of Trade, at(202) 325–0113.

1

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

BACKGROUND

Current customs law includes two key concepts: informed compli-ance and shared responsibility. Accordingly, the law imposes an obli-gation on CBP to provide the public with information concerning thetrade community’s responsibilities and rights under the customs andrelated laws. In addition, both the public and CBP share responsibil-ity in carrying out import requirements. For example, under section484 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. § 1484), theimporter of record is responsible for using reasonable care to enter,classify and value imported merchandise, and to provide any otherinformation necessary to enable CBP to properly assess duties, collectaccurate statistics, and determine whether any other applicable legalrequirement is met.

Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1625(c)(1), a notice was published in theCustoms Bulletin, Vol. 53, No. 39, on October 30, 2019, proposing tomodify one ruling letter pertaining to the tariff classification of plasticstethoscope covers. Any party who has received an interpretive rulingor decision (i.e., a ruling letter, internal advice memorandum ordecision, or protest review decision) on the merchandise subject tothis notice should have advised CBP during the comment period.

Similarly, pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1625(c)(2), CBP is revoking anytreatment previously accorded by CBP to substantially identicaltransactions. Any person involved in substantially identical transac-tions should have advised CBP during the comment period. An im-porter’s failure to advise CBP of substantially identical transactionsor of a specific ruling not identified in this notice may raise issues ofreasonable care on the part of the importer or its agents for impor-tations of merchandise subsequent to the effective date of this notice.

In HQ 967233, CBP affirmed the classification of two styles ofstethoscope covers the subject of New York Ruling Letters (“NY”)K83122, dated February 20, 2004, and NY K83786, dated March 24,2004. Specifically, HQ 967233 affirmed the classification of aStethocap™ in subheading 9018.90.80, HTSUS, which provides for,in pertinent part, accessories of instruments and appliances used inthe medical field, and the classification of a Stethocap™ treated withantimicrobial agent in subheading 3808.90.70, HTSUS, which pro-vides for, in pertinent part, insecticides, rodenticides, fungicides, her-bicides, antisprouting products and plant-growth regulators, disin-fectants and similar products, put up in forms or packings for retailsale or as preparations or articles. CBP has reviewed HQ 967233 andhas determined the ruling letter to be partially in error as regards the

2 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 53, NO. 48, JANUARY 2, 2020

classification of the plastic stethoscope cover without antimicrobialagent. It is now CBP’s position that the plastic stethoscope coverwithout antimicrobial agent is properly classified in heading 3926,HTSUS, specifically subheading 3926.90.99, HTSUS, which providesfor “[O]ther articles of plastics and articles of other materials ofheadings 3901 to 3914: Other: Other.”

Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1625(c)(1), CBP is modifying HQ 967233and revoking or modifying any other ruling not specifically identifiedto reflect the analysis contained in the proposed HQ H304940, setforth as an attachment to this notice. Additionally, pursuant to 19U.S.C. § 1625(c)(2), CBP is to revoking any treatment previouslyaccorded by CBP to substantially identical transactions.

In accordance with 19 U.S.C. § 1625(c), this ruling will becomeeffective 60 days after publication in the Customs Bulletin.Dated: December 10, 2019

GREG CONNOR

forMYLES B. HARMON,

DirectorCommercial and Trade Facilitation Division

Attachment


HQ H304940December 10, 2019

OT:RR:CTF:EMAIN H304940 SKCATEGORY: Classification

TARIFF NO.: 3926.90.99MR. CRAIG LEWIS, ESQ.HOGAN & HARTSON, LLP555 13TH STREET, N.W.WASHINGTON, DC 20004–1109

RE: Modification of HQ 967233; stethoscope cover without antimicrobialagent; Stethocap™; other made up articles.

DEAR MR. LEWIS:In HQ 967233, issued to you on February 18, 2005, on behalf of your client

The Buzz Group LLC (Buzz Group), U.S. Customs and Border Protection(CBP) affirmed the classification under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of theUnited States (HTSUS) of two styles of stethoscope covers the subject of NewYork Ruling Letters (NY) K83122, dated February 20, 2004, and K83786,dated March 24, 2004. Specifically, HQ 967233 affirmed the classification of aStethocap™ in subheading 9018.90.80, HTSUS, which provides for, in perti-nent part, accessories of instruments and appliances used in the medicalfield, and the classification of a Stethocap™ with antimicrobial agent insubheading 3808.90.70, HTSUS, which provides for, in pertinent part, insec-ticides, rodenticides, fungicides, herbicides, anti-sprouting products andplant-growth regulators, disinfectants and similar products, put up in formsor packings for retail sale or as preparations or articles.

Upon review, CBP has determined HQ 967233 to be partially in error asregards the classification of the Stethocap™ without antimicrobial agent.CBP is modifying HQ 967233 according to the analysis set forth below.

Pursuant to section 625(c)(1), Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1625(c)(1)), asamended by section 623 of Title VI, a notice proposing to modify HQ 967233was published on October 30, 2019, in Volume 53, Number 39 of the CustomsBulletin. No comments were received in opposition to the proposed action.

FACTS:

Two styles of stethoscope covers were at issue in HQ 967233. This modifi-cation concerns only the Stethocap™ style presented without an antimicro-bial agent.

In HQ 967233, the Stethocap™ (without antimicrobial agent) is describedas consisting of a blister pack containing two, circular, plastic caps, eachmeasuring 2” in diameter. The cap is designed to be snapped onto the dia-phragm of a standard manual stethoscope, prior to auscultating the patient,to prevent the transmission of microorganisms - and the risk of infection -from the diaphragm to the patient.

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

Classification under the HTSUS is in accordance with the General Rules ofInterpretation (GRIs). GRI 1 provides that the classification of goods shall bedetermined according to the terms of the headings of the tariff schedule andany relative Section or Chapter Notes. In the event that the goods cannot be


classified solely on the basis of GRI 1, and if the headings and legal notes donot otherwise require, the remaining GRIs may then be applied.

The HTSUS subheadings under consideration are as follows:3926 Other articles of plastics and articles of other materials of head-

ings 3901 to 3914:

9018 Instruments and appliances used in medical, surgical, dental orveterinary sciences, including scintigraphic apparatus, otherelectro-medical apparatus and sight-testing instruments; partsand accessories thereof:

Notes 1 and 2 to Chapter 39, HTSUS, provide, in pertinent part:1. Throughout the tariff schedule the expression “plastics” means those

materials of headings 3901 to 3914 which are or have been capable,either at the moment of polymerization or at some subsequent stage,of being formed under external influence (usually heat and pressure,if necessary with a solvent or plasticizer) by molding, casting, extrud-ing, rolling or other process into shapes which are retained on theremoval of the external influence.

* * *

2. This chapter does not cover:

* * *

(u) Articles of Chapter 90 (for example, optical elements, spectacleframes, drawing instruments);

* * *Note 2 to Chapter 90, HTSUS, provides:

Subject to note 1 above, parts and accessories for machines, appara-tus, instruments or articles of this chapter are to be classified ac-cording to the following rules:

(a) Parts and accessories which are goods included in any of the head-ings of this chapter or of chapter 84, 85 or 91 (other than heading8485, 8548 or 9033) are in all cases to be classified in their respectiveheadings;

(b) Other parts and accessories, if suitable for use solely or principallywith a particular kind of machine, instrument or apparatus, or witha number of machines, instruments or apparatus of the same head-ing (including a machine, instrument or apparatus of heading 9010,9013, or 9031) are to be classified with the machines, instruments orapparatus of that kind;

(c) All other parts and accessories are to be classified in heading 9033.The Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System Explanatory

Notes (EN’s) constitute the official interpretation of the Harmonized System.While not legally binding on the contracting parties, and therefore not dis-positive, the EN’s provide a commentary on the scope of each heading of theHarmonized System and are thus useful in ascertaining the classification ofmerchandise under the system. CBP believes the EN’s should always beconsulted. See T.D. 89–80, 54 Fed. Reg. 35127, 35128 (Aug. 23, 1989).


The EN to heading 9018, HTSUS, states, in pertinent part:This heading covers a very wide range of instruments and applianceswhich, in the vast majority of cases, are used only in professional practice(e.g., by doctors, surgeons, dentists, veterinary surgeons, midwives), ei-ther to make a diagnosis, to prevent or treat an illness or to operate, etc.Instruments and appliances for anatomical or autoptic work, dissection,etc., are also included, as are, under certain conditions, instruments andappliances for dental laboratories (see Part (II) below). The instrumentsof the heading may be made of any material (including precious metals).

As Chapter 39 Note 2(u) excludes articles of Chapter 90, our initial analysisis whether the subject merchandise is classifiable as an accessory of instru-ments and appliances used in medical, surgical, dental or veterinary sciencesof heading 9018, HTSUS.

The term “accessory” is not defined in the HTSUS or in the ENs. This officehas previously stated that the term “accessory” is generally understood tomean an article that must directly contribute to the effectiveness of theprincipal article (e.g., facilitate the use or handling of the particular article,widen the range of its uses, or improve its operation). See HQ 301594, datedDecember 18, 2018; HQ 958710, dated April 8, 1996; and, HQ 950166, datedNovember 8, 1991. We also employ the common and commercial meanings ofthe term “accessory,” as per Rollerblade v. United States, wherein the Courtof International Trade (C.I.T.) derived from various dictionaries that anaccessory must relate directly to the thing accessorized. See Rollerblade, Inc.v. United States, 116 F.Supp. 2d 1247 (Ct. Int’l Trade 2000), aff’d, 282 F.3d1349 (Fed. Cir. 2002) (holding that inline roller skating protective gear is notan accessory because the protective gear does not directly act on the rollerskates).

In applying the court’s standard to the instant facts, we must examinewhether the subject covers directly contribute to the effectiveness of a stetho-scope’s function. A stethoscope is a medical instrument for “detecting soundsproduced in the body that are conveyed to the ears of the listener throughrubber tubing connected with a piece placed upon the area to be examined.”See https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/stethoscope (last visitedAugust 2019). In HQ 967233, the subject stethoscope caps are described asproviding a barrier to prevent contamination of a stethoscope. As such, theydo not directly add to or enhance a stethoscope’s function of detecting soundsin the body. Therefore, the subject stethoscope covers do not rise to the levelof an accessory of a medical instrument or appliance of heading 9018,HTSUS.

As the subject articles are not accessories of heading 9018, HTSUS, Note2(b) to Chapter 90 is inapplicable. The subject plastic stethoscope covers arealso not included under any other more specific provision in Chapter 39, andtherefore they fall to heading 3926, HTSUS, specifically subheading 3926.90,HTSUS, as other articles of plastic. We further note that CBP has historicallyclassified various styles of protective barriers used in the medical arena tocover medical apparatus according to their constituent material. In NY883919, dated April 13, 1993, CBP classified plastic disposable banded bags,used to cover non-sterile items in the operating room, and surgical drapes,under subheading 3926.90, HTSUS, as other articles of plastic. In NYC81283, dated November 28, 1997, CBP classified a protective drape de-signed to protect equipment in an operating room under subheading 3926.90,


HTSUS. See also NY 8708868, dated February 13, 1992, in which CBPclassified protective barriers designed to shield C-arm and mobile X-raydrapes, microscope, laser and video camera drapes, and x-ray cassettedrapes” under 3926.90, HTSUS. In NY N041298, dated November 3, 2008,CBP classified a general purpose probe cover used to shield medical appara-tus in subheading 3926.90, HTSUS.

HOLDING:

By application of GRIs 1 and 6, the Stethocap™ without antimicrobial isclassifiable under subheading 3926.90.99, HTSUS, which provides for“[O]ther articles of plastics and articles of other materials of headings 3901 to3914: Other: Other.” The column one, general duty rate of duty is 5.3 percentad valorem.

Duty rates are provided for your convenience and are subject to change.The text of the most recent HTSUS and the accompanying duty rates areprovided on the internet at www.usitc.gov.

EFFECT ON OTHER RULINGS:

HQ 967233, dated February 18, 2005 is hereby MODIFIED in accordancewith the above analysis.

In accordance with 19 U.S.C. 1625(c), this ruling will become effective 60days after its publication in the Customs Bulletin.

Sincerely,GREG CONNOR

forMYLES B. HARMON,


◆

PROPOSED REVOCATION AND MODIFICATION OF FIVERULING LETTERS AND REVOCATION OF TREATMENT

RELATING TO THE TARIFF CLASSIFICATION OFEMBROIDERED MOTIFS


ACTION: Notice of proposed modification of three ruling letters andrevocation of two ruling letters and revocation of treatment relatingto the tariff classification of embroidered motifs.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 625(c), Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C.§1625(c)), as amended by section 623 of title VI (Customs Modern-ization) of the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementa-tion Act (Pub. L. 103–182, 107 Stat. 2057), this notice advises inter-ested parties that U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) intendsto modify three ruling letters and revoke two ruling letters concern-


ing tariff classification of embroidered motifs under the HarmonizedTariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Similarly, CBP intendsto revoke any treatment previously accorded by CBP to substantiallyidentical transactions. Comments on the correctness of the proposedactions are invited.

DATE: Comments must be received on or before January 31, 2020.

ADDRESS: Written comments are to be addressed to U.S.Customs and Border Protection, Office of Trade, Regulations andRulings, Attention: Trade and Commercial Regulations Branch, 90K St., NE, 10th Floor, Washington, DC 20229–1177. Submittedcomments may be inspected at the address stated above duringregular business hours. Arrangements to inspect submittedcomments should be made in advance by calling Mr. Joseph Clarkat (202) 325–0118.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tanya Secor,Food, Textiles and Marking Branch, Regulations and Rulings,Office of Trade, at (202) 325–0062.


BACKGROUND


Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. §1625(c)(1), this notice advises interestedparties that CBP is proposing to modify three ruling letters andrevoke two ruling letters pertaining to the tariff classification ofembroidered motifs. Although in this notice, CBP is specifically refer-ring to New York Ruling Letter (“NY”) B85277, dated May 13, 1997(Attachment A), NY 801210, dated August 22, 1994 (Attachment B),NY 889565, dated August 26, 1993 (Attachment C), NY 800463, datedJuly 24, 1994 (Attachment D), and NY 881559, dated January 6, 1993


(Attachment E), this notice also covers any rulings on this merchan-dise which may exist, but have not been specifically identified. CBPhas undertaken reasonable efforts to search existing databases forrulings in addition to the four identified. No further rulings have beenfound. Any party who has received an interpretive ruling or decision(i.e., a ruling letter, internal advice memorandum or decision, orprotest review decision) on the merchandise subject to this noticeshould advise CBP during the comment period.

Similarly, pursuant to 19 U.S.C. §1625(c)(2), CBP is proposing torevoke any treatment previously accorded by CBP to substantiallyidentical transactions. Any person involved in substantially identicaltransactions should advise CBP during this comment period. Animporter’s failure to advise CBP of substantially identical transac-tions or of a specific ruling not identified in this notice may raiseissues of reasonable care on the part of the importer or its agents forimportations of merchandise subsequent to the effective date of thefinal decision on this notice.

In NY B85277, NY 801210, NY 889565, NY 800463, and NY881559, CBP classified embroidered motifs imported in strips inheading 5810, HTSUS, specifically in subheading 5810.92.0040,HTSUS, or its successor subheading 5810.92.1000, HTSUS, whichprovides for “Embroidery in the piece, in strips or in motifs: Otherembroidery: Of man-made fibers: Badges, emblems and motifs.” CBPhas reviewed NY B85277, NY 801210, NY 889565, NY 800463, andNY 881559, and has determined the ruling letters to be in error. It isnow CBP’s position that embroidered motifs are properly classified insubheading 5810.92.90, HTSUS, which provides for “Embroidery inthe piece, in strips or on motifs: Other embroidery: Of man-madefibers: Other: Other: Other.”

Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. §1625(c)(1), CBP is proposing to modify NYB85277, NY 801210, and NY 889565, and revoke NY 800463 and NY881559, and to revoke or modify any other ruling not specificallyidentified to reflect the analysis contained in the proposed Headquar-ters Ruling Letter (“HQ”) H301424, set forth as Attachment F to thisnotice. Additionally, pursuant to 19 U.S.C. §1625(c)(2), CBP is pro-posing to revoke any treatment previously accorded by CBP to sub-stantially identical transactions.

Before taking this action, consideration will be given to any writtencomments timely received.


Dated: December 11, 2019MYLES B. HARMON,


Attachments


ATTACHMENT A

NY B85277May 13, 1997

CLA-2–58:RR:NC:TA:351 B85277CATEGORY: ClassificationTARIFF NO.: 5810.92.1000

MR. W.J. GONZALEZ

GENERAL MANAGER

TRANS-UNION CUSTOMS SERVICE, INC.11941 S. PRAIRIE AVENUE

HAWTHORNE, CA 90250

RE: The tariff classification of motifs from China

DEAR MR. GONZALEZ:In your letter dated May 2, 1997 you requested a tariff classification ruling

on behalf of your client Silk Bead Incorporated.You have submitted three samples of motifs that will be used for decorating

dresses. Samples M5 and M357 are designs constructed out of plastic beadsand sequins stitched to a backing of 100% polyester. Each sample measuresapproximately 9 by 4 inches. Sample St-7777 is also made of glass beads andsequins stitched to a backing of man-made fiber. This item will be importedin continuous lengths, but can be easily cut apart into individual pieces ofapproximately 1 by 1 inch separate articles that can stand alone as individualappliques.

The applicable subheading for the motifs will be 5810.92.1000, HarmonizedTariff Schedule of the United States (HTS), which provides for embroidery inthe piece, in strips or in motifs; other embroidery; of man-made fibers;badges, emblems and motifs. The rate of duty will be 7.1 percent ad valorem.This HTS subheading will not be subject to visa/quota requirements.

This ruling is being issued under the provisions of Part 177 of the CustomsRegulations (19 C.F.R. 177).

A copy of the ruling or the control number indicated above should beprovided with the entry documents filed at the time this merchandise isimported. If you have any questions regarding the ruling, contact NationalImport Specialist Jeff Konzet at 212–466–5885.

Sincerely,PAUL K. SCHWARTZ

Chief,Textiles & Apparel Branch

National CommoditySpecialist Division


ATTACHMENT B

NY 801210August 22, 1994

CLA-2–58:S:N:N6:351 801210CATEGORY: Classification

TARIFF NO.: 5810.92.0040; 5810.92.0080;5808.90.0010; 9606.29.6000

MR. ALEX KANG

WTS CUSTOMS BROKERAGE

5730 W. MANCHESTER BLVD., SUITE 280LOS ANGELES, CA 90045

RE: The tariff classification of embroidered fabrics, buttons and tassels fromChina.

DEAR MR. KANG:In your letter dated August 11, 1994, on behalf of Jacob Supplies, you

requested a classification ruling.You have submitted five samples of decorative textile items, as follows: (1)

style # AS/JC 1006, beaded motifs; (2) style # AS/RP 1003/100, a beaded fabricstrip in continuous lengths; (3) style # FR/KC 009, a 1 3/16 inch diameter flatbutton made of 100% rayon cords; (4) style # FR/TT2, a 100% rayon tassel;and (5) style # FR/KC 016, a 1 inch diameter dome-shaped button made of100% rayon cords. The beaded motifs, (1), are made with imitation pearls andsequins sewn on to a sheer woven ground fabric assumed to be of man-madefibers. They consist of star-shaped motifs with 2 inch long dangling beads.These motifs are imported by the yard for the convenience of transportation,and they can be easily cut apart. The 1 1/8 inch wide fully beaded strip, (2),has sequins and other beads embroidered to a 1 1/2 inch wide sheer wovenground fabric that appears to be made of multifilament yarns. The tassel, (4),measures 3 1/2 inches in length including a 1 3/8 inch disc-shaped top portionmade of twisted cord. Please note that the tassel, (4), and the two buttons, (3)and (5), are not Chinese frog buttons as described in your letter.

The applicable subheading for the first item, style # AS/JC 1006, will be5810.92.0040, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS), whichprovides for embroidery in the piece, in strips or motifs; other embroidery; ofman-made fibers; badges, emblems and motifs. The duty rate will be 8.4percent ad valorem.

The second item, style # AS/RP 1003/100, will be classifiable under theprovision for embroidery in the piece, in strips or in motifs; other embroidery;of man-made fibers; other; other, in subheading 5810.92.0080, HTS. The rateof duty will be 17 percent ad valorem.

The fourth item, style # FR/TT2, will be classifiable under the provision fortassels, pompons and similar articles; other; of man-made fibers, in subhead-ing 5808.90.0010, HTS. The rate of duty will be 7.8 percent ad valorem.

The third and fifth items, style # FR/KC 009 and # FR/KC 016, will beclassifiable under the provision for buttons, press-fasteners, snap-fastenersand press-studs, button molds and other parts of these articles; buttons;other; other; other, in subheading 9606.29.6000, HTS. The rate of duty will be5.7 percent ad valorem.


The second and fourth items, # AS/RP 1003/100 and # FR/TT2, fall withintextile category designation 229. Based upon international textile tradeagreements, products of China are subject to quota and the requirement of avisa.

The designated textile and apparel categories may be subdivided intoparts. If so, visa and quota requirements applicable to the subject merchan-dise may be affected. Since part categories are the result of internationalbilateral agreements which are subject to frequent renegotiations andchanges, to obtain the most current information available, we suggest thatyou check, close to the time of shipment, the Status Report on Current ImportQuotas (Restraint Levels), an internal issuance of the U.S. Customs Service,which is available for inspection at your local Customs office.

This ruling is being issued under the provisions of Section 177 of theCustoms Regulations (19 C.F.R. 177).

A copy of this ruling letter should be attached to the entry documents filedat the time this merchandise is imported. If the documents have been filedwithout a copy, this ruling should be brought to the attention of the Customsofficer handling the transaction.

Sincerely,JEAN F. MAGUIRE

Area DirectorNew York Seaport


ATTACHMENT C

NY 889565August 26, 1993

CLA-2–58:S:N:N6:351 889565CATEGORY: Classification

TARIFF NO.: 5810.92.0040; 7018.90.5000MS. CECILIA CASTELLANOS

WITHROW, ZERWEKH & CO.P.O. BOX 368WILMINGTON, CA 90748

RE: The tariff classification of four beaded embroidered motifs imported instrip form and one glass beaded fringe, from China.

DEAR MS. CASTELLANOS:In your letter dated August 16, 1993, on behalf of your client ABM Enter-

prises, you requested a tariff classification ruling.You have submitted four samples of fully beaded embroidered motifs im-

ported in strip form, item nos. BT-501, WT-235, WT-222 and WT-237; and onesample of beaded fringe, item no. BF-901. In your letter, item no. BT-501 isdescribed as a gold colored beaded ornament trim with beads and sequins. Itmeasures approximately 3 1/4 inches by 2 1/2 inches. Item no. WT-235 is ablack leaf-shaped motif measuring 2 inches by 2 inches. Item no. WT-222 isa bow tie-shaped motif with dangling imitation plastic pearl beads. Item no.WT-227 is a cluster motif with various sizes of imitation plastic pearls sewnon to the ground fabric or dangling. The above four motifs have beadsembroidered to their sheer plain woven ground fabrics, which are continuousstrips attaching the motifs for the convenience of transportation and tofacilitate attachment. The ground fabrics, which are assumed to be of man-made fibers, can be cut without damaging the appliques. Since the motifs canbe cut apart and sold separately, they will be classifiable according to theirindividual character. Item no. BF-901 is a continuous decorative fringe articlewith dangling glass beads. The fringe is approximately 2 inches long. Theglass beads are sewn on to a 3/8 inch wide utilitarian narrow woven fabric forthe convenience of transportation. The fabric tape will be completely ob-scured after the trimming is sewn on to a garment. All five items will be usedas decoration on ladies’ wearing apparel.

The applicable subheading for item nos. BT-501, WT-235, WT-222 andWT-227 will be 5810.92.0040, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the UnitedStates (HTS), which provides for embroidery in the piece, in strips or inmotifs; other embroidery; of man-made fibers; badges, emblems and motifs.The rate of duty will be 8.4 percent ad valorem.

Item no. BF-901 will be classifiable under the provision for glass beads,imitation pearls, imitation precious or semiprecious stones and similar glasssmallwares and articles thereof other than imitation jewelry; ...; other; other;in subheading 7018.90.5000, HTS. The rate of duty will be 6.6 percent advalorem.



ATTACHMENT D

NY 800463July 27, 1994

CLA-2–58:S:N:N6:351 800463CATEGORY: ClassificationTARIFF NO.: 5810.92.0040

MR. W.J. GONZALEZ

TRANS-UNION CUSTOMS SERVICE, INC.11941 S. PRAIRIE AVENUE

HAWTHORNE, CA 90250

RE: The tariff classification of beaded embroidered motifs imported in stripform, from China.

DEAR MR. GONZALEZ:In your letter dated July 20, 1994, on behalf of your client Formal Classic

Inc., you requested a tariff classification ruling.You have submitted a sample of fully beaded embroidered motifs imported

in strip form in 10 yard lengths. No item number is indicated in your letteror on the sample. The motifs have imitation plastic pearls and white beadssewn on to their sheer plain woven ground fabric, which is a continuous stripattaching the motifs for the convenience of transportation and to facilitateattachment. The ground fabric, which is assumed to be of man-made fibers,can be cut without damaging the appliques. Since the motifs can be cut apartin groups of two leaf-shapes, measuring approximately 5 inches by 2 inches,and sold separately; they will be classifiable according to their individualcharacter.

The applicable subheading for the motif imported in strip form will be5810.92.0040, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS), whichprovides for embroidery in the piece, in strips or in motifs; other embroidery;of man-made fibers; badges, emblems and motifs. The rate of duty will be 8.4percent ad valorem.






ATTACHMENT E

NY 881559January 6, 1993

CLA-2–58:S:COM:N6:351 881559CATEGORY: ClassificationTARIFF NO.: 5810.92.0040

MR. MICHAEL GULUZZI

EXCEL INTERNATIONAL CO.147–48 182ND ST., SUITE 201JAMAICA, NY 11413

RE: The tariff classification of beaded motifs imported in strip form, fromHaiti or China.

DEAR MR. GULUZZI:In your letter dated December 28, 1992, on behalf of Royal Craft Trimming

Corp., you requested a tariff classification ruling.You have submitted two samples of fully beaded motifs, importer’s style

numbers 4648 and 5603. Both motifs have nylon woven ground fabrics. ItemNo. 4648 is a leaf-shaped motif with green plastic sequins. It measures 2inches by 2 inches. Item No. 5603 is a circular-shaped beaded appliquemeasuring 1 inch in diameter, and it has a large imitation gemstone sur-rounded by smaller plastic beads.

The samples are embroidered motifs in continuous strips. The strips ofembroidery consist of a series of motifs connected by small sections of groundfabrics between each motif to form the strips. You indicate in your letter thatafter importation the motifs are to be cut and appliqued to dresses, gowns,etc. in order to enhance the appearance of the garment.

The applicable subheading for the embroidered motifs fall will be5810.92.0040, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS), whichprovides embroidery in the piece, in strips or in motifs; other embroidery; ofman-made fibers; badges, emblems and motifs. The rate of duty will be 8.4percent ad valorem.

In your request you questioned whether or not this merchandise will besubject to visa or export license requirements when imported from Haiti orChina. Merchandise classified in HTS 5810.92.0040 is presently not subjectto any visa or quota restrictions.






ATTACHMENT F

HQ H301424OT:RR:CTF:FTM H301424 TJS

CATEGORY: ClassificationTARIFF NO.: 5810.92.90

MR. W.J. GONZALEZ

GENERAL MANAGER

TRANS-UNION CUSTOMS SERVICE, INC

11941 S. PRAIRIE AVENUE

HAWTHORNE, CA 90250

RE: Modification of NY B85277, NY 801210, and NY 889565; Revocation ofNY 800463 and NY 881559; Classification of Embroidered MotifsImported in Continuous Lengths

DEAR MR. GONZALEZ,This is to inform you that U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) has

reconsidered New York Ruling Letter (“NY”) B85277, issued to you on May13, 1997 and NY 800463, issued to you on July 24, 1994, in addition to NY801210, dated August 22, 1994, NY 889565, dated August 26, 1993; and NY881559, dated January 6, 1993, regarding the tariff classification of certainembroidered motifs under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the UnitedStates (“HTSUS”). In those rulings, CBP classified certain embroidered mo-tifs under subheading 5810.92.0040, HTSUS, or its current successor provi-sion 5810.92.1000, HTSUS, which provides for “Embroidery in the piece, instrips or in motifs: Other embroidery: Of man-made fibers: Badges, emblemsand motifs.” We have determined that NY B85277, NY 801210, and NY889565 are partially incorrect, and NY 800463 and NY 881559 are incorrect.For the reasons set forth below, we hereby modify NY B85277, NY 801210,and NY 889565, and revoke NY 800463 and NY 881559.

FACTS:

The subject merchandise consists of various styles of embroidered motifsimported in continuous lengths. NY B85277 addressed the classification ofthree samples of motifs used for decorating dresses, but only one is at issuehere. Sample St-7777 consisted of glass beads and sequins stitched to abacking of man-made fiber. The item was to be imported in continuouslengths, but could be easily cut apart into individual pieces of approximatelyone inch by one inch separate articles that could stand alone as individualappliqués.

NY 801210 classified five samples of decorative textile items, but only onestyle is at issue here. Style # AS/JC 1006 was beaded motifs made withimitation pearls and sequins sewn onto a sheer woven ground fabric assumedto be of man-made fibers. They consisted of star-shaped motifs with two inchlong dangling beads. These motifs were imported by the yard for the conve-nience of transportation and could be easily cut apart.

NY 889565 classified four styles of fully beaded embroidered motifs im-ported in strip form and one style of beaded fringe. At issue here was theclassification of the embroidered motifs, items BT-501, WT-235, WT-222 andWT-227. BT-501 was a gold-colored ornament trim with beads and sequins,measuring approximately 3 ¼ inches by 2 ½ inches. WT-235 was a blackleaf-shaped motif measuring two inches by two inches. WT-222 was a bow


tie-shaped motif with dangling plastic imitation pearl beads. WT-227 was acluster motif with various sizes of imitation plastic pearls sewn onto theground fabric or dangling. These four motifs had beads embroidered to theirsheer plain woven ground fabrics, which were continuous strips attaching themotifs for the convenience of transportation and to facilitate attachment. Theground fabrics, which were assumed to be of man-made fibers, could be cutwithout damaging the appliqués.

NY 800463 concerned fully beaded embroidered motifs imported in stripform in ten yard lengths. The motifs had imitation plastic pearls and whitebeads sewn onto their sheer plain woven ground fabric, which was a continu-ous strip attaching the motifs for the convenience of transportation and tofacilitate attachment. The ground fabric, which was assumed to be of man-made fibers, could be cut without damaging the appliqués. The motifs couldbe cut apart in groups of two leaf-shapes, measuring approximately fiveinches by two inches, and sold separately.

NY 881559 concerned two fully beaded motifs, Item Nos. 4648 and 5603.Both motifs had nylon woven ground fabrics. Item No. 4648 was a leaf-shapedmotif with green plastic sequins and measured two inches by two inches.Item No. 5603 was a circular-shaped beaded appliqué measuring one inch indiameter, and had a large imitation gemstone surrounded by smaller plasticbeads. The provided samples were embroidered motifs in continuous strips.The strips of embroidery consisted of a series of motifs connected by smallsections of ground fabrics between each motif to form the strips. After im-portation, the motifs were to be cut and appliquéd to dresses, gowns, etc., inorder to enhance the appearance of the garment.

NY B85277, NY 801210, NY 889565, NY 800463, and NY 881559 classifiedthe subject embroidered motifs under subheading 5810.92.0040, HTSUS, orits successor provision 5810.92.1000, HTSUS, which provides for “Embroi-dery in the piece, in strips or in motifs: Other embroidery: Of man-madefibers: Badges, emblems and motifs.”

ISSUE:

Whether the embroidered motifs imported in strips are classified in sub-heading 5810.92.1000, HTSUS, as embroidery in the form of motifs, or5810.92.90, HTSUS, as embroidery in the piece.

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

Classification under the HTSUS is made in accordance with the GeneralRules of Interpretation (“GRI”). GRI 1 provides that the classification of goodsshall be determined according to the terms of the headings of the tariffschedule and any relative section or chapter notes. In the event that thegoods cannot be classified solely on the basis of GRI 1, and if the headings andlegal notes do not otherwise require, the remaining GRI may then be appliedin order. Pursuant to GRI 6, classification at the subheading level uses thesame rules, mutatis mutandis, as classification at the heading level.

The HTSUS provisions under consideration are as follows:

5810.92: Embroidery in the piece, in strips or in motifs: Other embroidery:Of man-made fibers:

5810.92.10: Badges, emblems and motifs. . .

5810.92.90: Other. . .


* * * *The Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System Explanatory

Notes (“ENs”) constitute the official interpretation of the Harmonized Systemat the international level. While neither legally binding nor dispositive, theENs provide a commentary on the scope of each heading of the HTSUS andare generally indicative of the proper interpretation of these headings. SeeT.D. 89–80, 54 Fed. Reg. 35127, 35128 (Aug. 23, 1989).

EN 58.10 provides, in relevant part:

(III) APPLIQUE WORK This consists of a ground of textile fabric or felt on which are sewn, byembroidery or ordinary stitches:

(A) Beads, sequins or similar ornamental accessories; these accessoriesare generally made of glass, gelatin, metal or wood, and are sewn soas to produce a pattern or a scattered design on the ground fabric.

(B) Ornamental motifs of textile or other materials. These motifs areusually a textile fabric (including lace), of a texture different fromthat of the ground fabric and cut in various patterns which are sewnto the ground fabric; in certain cases, the ground fabric is removed atthe places covered by the applied motif.

(C) Braid, chenille yarn or other trimmings, etc., in the form of a designon the ground fabric.

All varieties of embroidery described remain within this headingwhen in the following forms:

(1) In the piece or in strips of various widths. These pieces or stripsmay bear a series of identical designs, whether or not intended forsubsequent separation to be made up into finished articles (e.g.,strips of embroidered labels for marking articles of apparel, or piecesembroidered at regular intervals intended to be cut up and made upinto bibs).

(2) In the form of motifs, i.e., individual pieces of embroidered designserving no other function than to be incorporated or appliquéd aselements of embroidery in, for example, underwear or articles ofapparel or furnishings. They may be cut to any shape, backed orotherwise assembled. They include badges, emblems, “flashes”, ini-tials, numbers, stars, national or sporting insignia, etc.

* * * *NY B85277, NY 801210, NY 889565, NY 800463, and NY 881559 classified

the embroidered motifs under the provision for “badges, emblems and mo-tifs,” noting that the strips of motifs could be cut apart and sold or usedindividually. We find this classification to be incorrect, especially in light ofthe descriptions set forth above in the Explanatory Notes.

The classification of the subject embroidered motifs will depend on theircondition upon importation, i.e., whether they are imported individually or inthe piece. We note that although the subject merchandise is referred to as“motifs,” a “motif” is merely “a single or repeated design or color.” Merriam-Webster Dictionary, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/motif (lastaccessed Oct. 9, 2019). The subject merchandise consists of motifs, but it mustbe determined whether they are “in the form of motifs” for tariff classification


purposes. EN 58.10 distinguishes embroidery “in the piece or in strips ofvarious widths” from embroidery “in the form of motifs.” Embroidery is “inthe form of motifs” if it is imported as individual pieces and its sole purposeis to be incorporated or appliquéd as elements of embroidery. See, e.g., Head-quarter Ruling Letter (“HQ”) 957317 (Mar. 10, 1995) (classifying embroideredmotifs in subheading 5810.92.10, HTSUS, as “in the form of motifs” becausethey were no longer “in the piece” once cut to irregular shapes to accommo-date embroidered designs and to enable a dress designer to use those designsto his/her needs.) Subsequent separation into individual pieces after impor-tation does not preclude the embroidery from being considered in the piece.Therefore, the fact that the subject embroidered motifs could be easily cutapart into individual pieces, and may be intended to do so, does not makethem eligible for classification as an individual motif. The subject embroi-dered motifs fall within the scope of “in the piece or in strips of variouswidths” under EN 58.10 because they are imported in continuous strips or bythe yard and bear a series of identical designs.

This is consistent with the rule set forth in United States v. Buss & Co., 5Ct. Cust. 110 (1914). Buss addressed the classification of woven cotton tapeimported in continuous lengths that bore cross marks at short intervalsindicating where to cut the tape into small pieces for use as coat hangers. Id.In Buss, the United States Court of Customs Appeals held that:

The rule expressed by the decisions just cited recognizes the fact thatmost small articles are not produced as individual or separate products ofthe loom, but for economy of manufacture are first woven “in the piece.”The rule of decision is therefore established that where such articles areimported in the piece and nothing remains to be done except to cut themapart they shall be treated for dutiable purposes as if already cut apartand assessed according to their individual character or identity. Thisfollows, however, only in case the character or identity of the individualarticles is fixed with certainty and in case the woven piece in its entiretyis not commercially capable of any other use.

Id. at 113. Thus, a product imported in the piece is classified as an individualarticle if it has the defined identity of the individual article and must beseparated to be commercially usable.

Here, the embroidered motifs are not classifiable as individual motifs if, atthe time of importation, they are commercially suitable for use as strips. Inother words, the identity of the good is not fixed with certainty as a motif.Although the subject embroidered motifs can be separated without damageand used as individual appliqués, they are also usable as strips, such as fortrimming. This variation provides the user a flexibility of design in a range ofapplications. Additionally, the embroidered strips provide the ease of fixedspacing if the user desires to position the motifs at regular intervals. Themotifs are used for embellishment regardless of form, but the length of theembellishment is not fixed with certainty and they are not dedicated for usesolely as individual appliqués or as strips. By being imported in continuouslengths or by the yard, the user can apply the motifs in the form they desire,whether that be as individual appliqués or as strips of various lengths.Because the embroidered motifs do not need to be separated to be commer-cially capable of use, we find that the subject embroidered motifs are notclassifiable according to their individual character.

In accordance with the above, the subject embroidered motifs are classifiedas “in the piece or in strips of various widths.” Embroidery, of man-made


fibers, that is imported in continuous lengths is classified under subheading5810.92.90, HTSUS. See, e.g., NY N260125 (Jan. 6, 2015); NY N137843 (Jan.13, 2011); and NY G86149 (Jan. 19, 2001) (classifying a floral motif importedin continuous lengths to be used as trimming). Thus, the subject embroideredmotifs are classified in subheading 5810.92.90, HTSUS.

Goods classified in this provision are dutiable according to the terms ofAdditional U.S. Note 3 to Chapter 58, which states that the general rate ofduty applicable to goods classified in subheading 5810.92.90, HTSUS, is“7.4%, but in the case of embroidery in the piece not less than the rate whichwould apply to such product if not embroidered.”1 Therefore, the rate of dutyfor the subject embroidered motifs is based on the classification of theirrespective ground fabric. NY B85277, NY 801210, NY 889565, NY 800463,and NY 881559 state that the ground fabrics of the subject embroideredmotifs are, or are assumed to be, made of man-made fabric. The rulings do notprovide enough information to determine the duty rate applicable to theground fabrics. Without this additional information regarding the groundfabric in these rulings, we are unable to determine the applicable duty ratefor the subject embroidered motifs.

HOLDING:

By application of GRIs 1 and 6, the subject embroidered motifs are classi-fied under subheading 5810.92.90, HTSUS, which provides for “Embroideryin the piece, in strips or in motifs: Other embroidery: Of man-made fibers:Other.” We cannot assess the applicable duty rate because we do not know theground fabric of the embroidered motifs.


NY B85277, dated May 13, 1997, NY 801210, dated August 22, 1994, andNY 889565, dated August 26, 1993, are hereby MODIFIED.

NY 800463, dated July 24, 1994, and NY 881559, are hereby REVOKED.In accordance with 19 U.S.C. § 1625(c), these rulings will become effective

60 days after their publication in the Customs Bulletin.Sincerely,

MYLES B. HARMON,Director

Commercial and Trade Facilitation Division

1 According to Additional U.S. Note 2 to Chapter 58, the column 1 rate of duty applicable tosubheading 5810.92.10, HTSUS, is “4.2%, but in the case of embroidery in the piece not lessthan the rate which would apply to such product if not embroidered.” We understand thatas a result of this ruling, embroidery in the piece shall not be classified in subheading5810.92.10, HTSUS, effectively nullifying the language of Additional U.S. Note 2 to Chapter58 applicable to embroidery in the piece. However, all embroidery classified in heading5810, HTSUS, with the exception of subheading 5810.10.00, HTSUS, that is imported in thepiece is dutiable at a rate not less than the rate which would apply to such product if notembroidered. See Additional U.S. Notes 1–5 to Chapter 58, HTSUS. Prior to 1994, only oneAdditional U.S. Note to Chapter 58 existed, which encompassed subheadings 5810.91,5810.92, and 5810.99, HTSUS, and provided a single duty rate for individual pieces ofembroidery and the current duty rate language for embroidery in the piece. The embroi-dered motifs in NY B85277, NY 801210, NY 889565, NY 800463, and NY 881559 wereassessed at the individual rate.


PROPOSED REVOCATION OF RULING LETTER RELATINGTO APPLICABILITY OF SUBHEADING 9802.00.50, HTSUS


ACTION: Notice of revocation of New York Ruling Letter (NY)M86482, dated September 25, 2006, regarding the applicability ofsubheading 9802.00.50, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the UnitedStates (HTSUS) to automotive rim forgings.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 625(c), Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C.§1625(c)), as amended by section 623 of title VI (Customs Modern-ization) of the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementa-tion Act (Pub. L. 103–182, 107 Stat. 2057), this notice advises inter-ested parties that U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) intendsto revoke NY M86482 regarding the applicability of subheading9802.00.50, HTSUS. Similarly, CBP intends to revoke any treatmentpreviously accorded by CBP to substantially identical transactions.Comments on the correctness of the proposed actions are invited.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 31,2020.

ADDRESSES: Written comments are to be addressed to U.S.Customs and Border Protection, Office of Trade, Regulations andRulings, Attention: Trade and Commercial Regulations Branch, 90K St., NE, 10th Floor, Washington, DC 20229–1177. Submittedcomments may be inspected at the address stated above duringregular business hours. Arrangements to inspect submittedcomments should be made in advance by calling Mr. Joseph Clarkat (202) 325–0118.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Kim,Valuation and Special Programs Branch, Regulations and Rulings,Office of Trade, at (202) 325–0158.


BACKGROUND

Current customs law includes two key concepts: informed compli-ance and shared responsibility. Accordingly, the law imposes an obli-gation on CBP to provide the public with information concerning thetrade community’s responsibilities and rights under the customs andrelated laws. In addition, both the public and CBP share responsibil-ity in carrying out import requirements. For example, under section484 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. § 1484), theimporter of record is responsible for using reasonable care to enter,


classify and value imported merchandise, and to provide any otherinformation necessary to enable CBP to properly assess duties, collectaccurate statistics, and determine whether any other applicable legalrequirement is met.

Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1625(c)(1), this notice advises interestedparties that CBP proposes to revoke NY M86482, dated September25, 2006 (Attachment A). This notice also covers any rulings on thismerchandise which may exist, but have not been specifically identi-fied. CBP has undertaken reasonable efforts to search existing data-bases for rulings in addition to the ruling identified. No furtherrulings have been found. Any party who has received an interpretiveruling or decision (i.e., a ruling letter, internal advice memorandumor decision, or protest review decision) on the merchandise subject tothis notice should advise CBP during the comment period.

Similarly, pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1625(c)(2), CBP is proposing torevoke any treatment previously accorded by CBP to substantiallyidentical transactions. Any person involved in substantially identicaltransactions should advise CBP during this comment period. Animporter’s failure to advise CBP of substantially identical transac-tions or of a specific ruling not identified in this notice may raiseissues of reasonable care on the part of the importer or its agents forimportations of merchandise subsequent to the effective date of thefinal decision on this notice.

In NY M86482, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) deter-mined that automotive rim forgings, exported to Mexico for variousoperations including grinding and polishing and then returned to theUnited States, were eligible for duty-free treatment under subhead-ing 9802.00.50, HTSUS, which provides for articles returned to theUnited States after exportation for repair or alterations. We havereviewed NY M86482 and determined it to be in error. It is now CBP’sposition that the operations undertaken in Mexico do not constituterepairs or alterations and therefore the automotive rim forgings arenot eligible for duty-free treatment under subheading 9802.00.50,HTSUS.

Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1625(c)(1), CBP is proposing to revoke NYM86482 and to revoke or modify any other ruling not specificallyidentified to reflect the analysis contained in the proposed Headquar-ters Ruling Letter (“HQ”) H306334, set forth as Attachment B to thisnotice. Additionally, pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1625(c)(2), CBP is pro-posing to revoke any treatment previously accorded by CBP to sub-stantially identical transactions.



Dated: December 11, 2019MONIKA R. BRENNER

forMYLES B. HARMON,


Attachments


ATTACHMENT A

NY M86482September 25, 2006

CLA-2–98:RR:NC:N1:101 M86482CATEGORY: Classification

TARIFF NO.: 9802.00.50MR. ALEX ROMERO

A.F. ROMERO & CO., INC.1749 STERGIOS RD

CALEXICO, CAP.O. BOX 989CALEXICO CA 92231

RE: The tariff classification of automotive rim forgings from Mexico aftercertain operations are performed in Mexico.

DEAR MR. ROMERO:In your letter dated August 28, 2006 you requested a tariff classification

ruling on behalf of your client Prime Wheel Corporation of Gardena, Califor-nia.

Prime Wheel Corporation imports forgings of automotive rims from Tai-wan. They are imported duty paid in Long Beach, California. After importa-tion and payment of duty, they are sent to Mexicali, B.C Mexico for thefollowing operations:

• Staging• Grinding with air grinder• Polishing with polishing wheel• Sanding• Buffing• Cleaning

After this process, each wheel must be free of any polish imperfections, thecolor must be even in all polished areas, the wheel must be free of pits, nicksand scratches in the face, and must be free of polish compound.

After the polishing in Mexico, they are returned to the US and a formalentry is filed. In the US the wheels undergo the following processes:

• Compound removal• Pre-clean spray wash• Clean spray wash• Rinse spray wash• Deoxidizer spray: Pre-treatment process prior to painting the wheels• Rinse spray wash• Oven Drying• Apply clear coat: Powder pain process• Curing• Coating thickness inspection• Packaging

The applicable subheading for the altered forgings will be 9802.00.50,Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), which providesfor Articles returned to the United States after having been exported forrepair or alterations. The rate of duty will be free.


Duty rates are provided for your convenience and are subject to change.The text of the most recent HTSUS and the accompanying duty rates areprovided on World Wide Web at http://www.usitc.gov/tata/hts/.


A copy of the ruling or the control number indicated above should beprovided with the entry documents filed at the time this merchandise isimported. If you have any questions regarding the ruling, contact NationalImport Specialist Robert DeSoucey at 646–733–3008.

Sincerely,ROBERT B. SWIERUPSKI

Director,National Commodity Specialist Division


ATTACHMENT B

HQ H306334OT:RR:CTF:VS H306334 JK

CATEGORY: ClassificationALEX ROMERO

A.F. ROMERO & CO., INC.1749 STERGIOS ROAD

CALEXICO, CA 92231

RE: Revocation of NY M86482; Subheading 9802.00.50, HTSUS; AutomotiveRim Forgings

DEAR MR. ROMERO:This is in reference to New York Ruling Letter (“NY”) M86482, dated

September 25, 2006. At issue was the applicability of subheading 9802.00.50,Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”), to automotiverim forgings subject to various operations including grinding and polishing inMexico. In NY M86482, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) deter-mined that the automotive rim forgings were eligible for duty-free treatmentunder subheading 9802.00.50, HTSUS, which provides for articles returnedto the United States after exportation for repair or alterations. We havereviewed NY M86482 and determined it to be in error. For the reasons setforth below, we are revoking the ruling.

FACTS:

NY M86482 stated, in relevant part, that Prime Wheel Corporation im-ports forgings of automotive rims from Taiwan. Subsequently, these forgingsare exported to Mexicali, Mexico to be subject to the following operations:staging, grinding with air grinder, polishing with polishing wheel, sanding,buffing, and cleaning. After the Mexican operations, they are returned to theUnited States, where they undergo the following operations: compound re-moval, pre-clean spray wash, clean spray wash, rinse spray wash, deoxidizerspray (pre-treatment process prior to painting the wheels), rinse spray wash,oven drying, application of a clear coat (powder pain process), curing, coatingthickness inspection, and packaging. CBP held that the automotive rimforgings were eligible for duty-free treatment under subheading 9802.00.50,HTSUS.

ISSUE:

Whether automotive rim forgings are eligible for tariff treatment undersubheading 9802.00.50, HTSUS?

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

Subheading 9802.00.50, HTSUS, provides a full or partial duty exemptionfor articles returned to the United States after having been exported to beadvanced in value or improved in condition by means of repairs or altera-tions. Articles returned to the United States after having been repaired oraltered in Mexico, whether or not pursuant to warranty, may be eligible forduty-free treatment, provided the documentary requirements of 19 CFR §181.64 are satisfied.

Section 181.64(a), CBP Regulations, (19 CFR § 181.64(a)) states, in perti-nent part:


‘[R]epairs or alterations’ means restoration, addition, renovation, redye-ing, cleaning, resterilizing, or other treatment which does not destroy theessential character of, or create a new and commercially different goodfrom, the good exported from the United States.

Section 181.64(b), CBP Regulations, (19 CFR § 181.64(b)) states:Goods not eligible for duty-free or reduced-duty treatment after repair oralteration. The duty-free or reduced-duty treatment referred to in para-graph (a) of this section shall not apply to goods which, in their conditionas exported from the United States to Canada or Mexico, are incompletefor their intended use and for which the processing operation performedin Canada or Mexico constitutes an operation that is performed as amatter of course in the preparation or manufacture of the finished goods.

Subheading 9802.00.50, HTSUS, treatment is precluded where: (1) theexported articles are not complete for their intended use and the foreignprocessing operation is a necessary step in the preparation or manufacture offinished articles; or (2) the operations performed abroad destroy the identityof the exported articles or create new or commercially different articlesthrough a process of manufacture. See Guardian Indus. Corp. v. UnitedStates, 3 Ct. Int’l Trade 9 (1982); Dolliff & Co., Inc., v. United States, 81 Cust.Ct. 1, C.D. 4755, 455 F. Supp. 618 (1978), aff’d, 66 C.C.P.A. 77, C.A.D. 1225,599 F.2d 1015 (1979).

In Guardian Industries v. United States, the Court of International Tradestated that, in construing “the tariff provision for repairs and alterationsperformed abroad, the focus is upon whether the exported article is ‘incom-plete’ or ‘unsuitable for its intended use’ prior to the foreign processing.”At issue in Guardian Industries was the question of whether subjectingU.S.-produced annealed glass to a tempering process in Canada to createglass for sliding glass patio doors qualified as an “alteration” under item806.20, TSUS (a predecessor provision of subheading 9802.00.50, HTSUS).The court noted that glass must be tempered (i.e., strengthened) for practicalsafety use reasons and to conform to U.S. federal regulations before it may bemarketed for use in sliding glass patio doors. In concluding that the temper-ing process was not an “alteration,” the court stated that “the exportedarticles of raw annealed glass were not ‘completed articles’ since they wereentirely unsuitable for their intended use” as sliding glass patio doors andrequired a manufacturing process to make them compete. The court furtherconcluded that, because the tempering of the annealed glass transformed theglass in name, use, performance characteristics and tariff classification, theoperation created a new and different commercial article. See also Dolliff &Company, Inc. v. United States, 81 Cust. Ct. 1, C.D. 4755, 455 F.Supp. 618(1978), aff’d, 66 CCPA 77, C.A.D. 1225, 599 F.2d 1015 (1979) (finding thatU.S.-origin fabrics which were exported to Canada as griege goods for heat-setting, chemical-scouring, dyeing, and treating with chemicals, were ineli-gible for 806.20, TSUS, as the processing in Canada resulted in a finishedfabric suitable for manufacture into curtains).

Conversely, in Amity Fabrics, Inc. v. United States, 43 Cust. Ct. 64, C.D.2104 (1959), “pumpkin” colored fabrics were exported to Italy to be redyedblack since the pumpkin color had gone out of fashion and black was aconsistently good seller. The court held that the identity of the goods was notlost or destroyed by the dyeing process, that no new article was created sincethere was no change in the character, quality, texture, or use of the merchan-dise; it was merely changed in color. The court found that such change


constituted an alteration for purposes of paragraph 1615(g) of the Tariff Actof 1930 (a predecessor provision of subheading 9802.00.50, HTSUS). See alsoRoyal Bead Novelty Co. v. United States, 68 Cust. Ct. 154, C.D. 4353, 342 F.Supp. 1394 (1972) (finding that uncoated glass beads exported and coatedwas entitled to preferential tariff treatment under 806.20, TSUS as theidentity of the beads was not lost or destroyed in the coating process and nonew article was created).

In Headquarters Ruling Letter (HQ) H288285, dated January 18, 2018,CBP found that painting automotive bumpers in Canada did not constitute arepair or alteration under subheading 9802.00.50, HTSUS. DistinguishingAmity Fabrics, which determined that redyeing (but not dyeing) was a repairor alteration, CBP noted that the process undertaken in Canada was not arepainting operation; rather, the painting process was a continuation of theproduction process that allowed the automotive bumpers to be fit for theirintended purpose. In addition, painting the bumpers prevented them fromrusting. As a result, CBP concluded that the bumpers were not ready for theirintended purpose prior to exportation to Canada. See also HQ H278563,dated November 23, 2016 (aluminum coils exported to Canada to undergo apaint coating process did not qualify for subheading 9802.00.50, HTSUStreatment).

Consistent with the above-referenced cases and rulings, we find that thestaging, grinding, sanding, polishing, buffing and cleaning operations under-taken in Mexico are necessary, intermediate steps in the production of thefinished good. As in Guardian Industries, where the raw annealed glass wasincomplete and unsuitable prior to the foreign processing, the automotiverims are merely “forgings” that require additional processing prior to expor-tation to Mexico to be suitable for their intended use. The grinding, polishing,sanding, buffing and cleaning processes undertaken in Mexico prepare theforgings for further additional operations in the United States, which includewashing, oven drying, and the application of a clear coat. As in HQ H278563,these operations are necessary to ensure the automotive rims can withstandrusting and exposure to the outdoor environment. Therefore, since the auto-motive rim forgings are not complete for their intended use prior to exporta-tion and the Mexican operations are merely a continuation of the productionof the finished good, we conclude that the subject goods do not qualify forsubheading 9802.00.50, HTSUS treatment.

HOLDING:

NY M86482 is revoked to reflect that the operations undertaken in Mexicoas described above do not constitute a repair or alteration and therefore theforgings of automotive rims are not eligible for duty-free treatment undersubheading 9802.00.50, HTSUS.


NY M86482, dated September 25, 2006, is hereby REVOKED. In accor-dance with 19 U.S.C. § 1625(c), this ruling will become effective 60 days afterpublication in the Customs Bulletin.

Sincerely,MYLES B. HARMON,



PROPOSED REVOCATION OF THREE RULING LETTERSAND REVOCATION OF TREATMENT RELATING TO THETARIFF CLASSIFICATION OF INSTANT NOODLE SOUP


ACTION: Notice of proposed revocation of three ruling letters andrevocation of treatment relating to the tariff classification of instantnoodle soup.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 625(c), Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C.§1625(c)), as amended by section 623 of title VI (Customs Modern-ization) of the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementa-tion Act (Pub. L. 103–182, 107 Stat. 2057), this notice advises inter-ested parties that U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) intendsto revoke three ruling letters concerning tariff classification of instantnoodle soup under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the UnitedStates (HTSUS). Similarly, CBP intends to revoke any treatmentpreviously accorded by CBP to substantially identical transactions.Comments on the correctness of the proposed actions are invited.

DATE: Comments must be received on or before January 31, 2020.

ADDRESS: Written comments are to be addressed to U.S.Customs and Border Protection, Office of Trade, Regulations andRulings, Attention: Trade and Commercial Regulations Branch, 90K St., NE, 10th Floor, Washington, DC 20229–1177. Submittedcomments may be inspected at the address stated above duringregular business hours. Arrangements to inspect submittedcomments should be made in advance by calling Mr. Joseph Clarkat (202) 325–0118.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tanya Secor,Food, Textiles and Marking Branch, Regulations and Rulings,Office of Trade, at (202) 325–0062.


BACKGROUND

Current customs law includes two key concepts: informed compli-ance and shared responsibility. Accordingly, the law imposes an obli-gation on CBP to provide the public with information concerning thetrade community’s responsibilities and rights under the customs andrelated laws. In addition, both the public and CBP share responsibil-ity in carrying out import requirements. For example, under section484 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. § 1484), the


importer of record is responsible for using reasonable care to enter,classify and value imported merchandise, and to provide any otherinformation necessary to enable CBP to properly assess duties, collectaccurate statistics, and determine whether any other applicable legalrequirement is met.

Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. §1625(c)(1), this notice advises interestedparties that CBP is proposing to revoke three ruling letters pertain-ing to the tariff classification of instant noodle soup. Although in thisnotice, CBP is specifically referring to New York Ruling Letter (“NY”)N125119, dated October 12, 2010 (Attachment A), Headquarters Rul-ing Letter (“HQ”) 953104, dated April 1, 1993 (Attachment B), andHQ 086309, dated March 1, 1990 (Attachment C), this notice alsocovers any rulings on this merchandise which may exist, but have notbeen specifically identified. CBP has undertaken reasonable efforts tosearch existing databases for rulings in addition to the three identi-fied. No further rulings have been found. Any party who has receivedan interpretive ruling or decision (i.e., a ruling letter, internal advicememorandum or decision, or protest review decision) on the merchan-dise subject to this notice should advise CBP during the commentperiod.


In NY N125119, HQ 953104, and HQ 086309, CBP classified in-stant ramen soup in heading 1902, HTSUS, which provides for“Pasta, whether or not cooked or stuffed (with meat or other sub-stances) or otherwise prepared, such as spaghetti, macaroni, noodles,lasagna, gnocchi, ravioli, cannelloni; couscous, whether or not pre-pared.” CBP has reviewed NY N125119, HQ 953104, and HQ 086309and has determined the ruling letters to be in error. It is now CBP’sposition that instant noodle soup is properly classified, in heading2104, HTSUS, specifically in subheading 2104.10.0000, HTSUS,which provides for “Soups and broths and preparations therefor;homogenized composite food preparations: Soups and broths andpreparations therefor.”

Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. §1625(c)(1), CBP is proposing to revoke NYN125119, HQ 953104, and HQ 086309, and to revoke or modify any


other ruling not specifically identified to reflect the analysis con-tained in the proposed HQ H304896, set forth as Attachment D to thisnotice. Additionally, pursuant to 19 U.S.C. §1625(c)(2), CBP is pro-posing to revoke any treatment previously accorded by CBP to sub-stantially identical transactions.

Before taking this action, consideration will be given to any writtencomments timely received.Dated: December 11, 2019

YULIYA A. GULIS

forMYLES B. HARMON,


Attachments


ATTACHMENT A

N125119October 12, 2010

CLA-2–19:OT:RR:NC:2:228CATEGORY: ClassificationTARIFF NO.: 1902.30.0060

MS. JESSICA ROWE

BLUE Q CORPORATION

103 HAWTHORNE AVENUE

PITTSFIELD, MA 0120

RE: The tariff classification of instant ramen noodle soup from China

DEAR MS. ROWE:In your letters dated September 9, 2010 and September 23, 2010, you

requested a tariff classification ruling.An ingredients statement, illustration of the chicken flavor ramen noodle

soup package and a sample accompanied your first letter. The sample wasexamined and disposed of. “Ramen Noodle Soup” consists of flat dried noodlesand a pouch of a powdered soup base. The soup base packet will be preparedin four different flavors: Chicken, Shrimp, Spicy Beef and Spicy Vegetable.The product is put up for retail sale in a package containing 3 ounces (85grams), net weight.

The declared ingredients for the noodles are wheat flour, palm oil, salt,sugar, guar gum, garlic powder. The manufacturing process for the noodleswas described in your second letter. The ingredients are mixed, rolled and cutinto strips, steamed and cut into blocks, deep fried and air cooled, andpackaged with different flavor soup base packets. Package instructions directthe user to bring 2 cups of cold water to a boil, insert the noodles and cook for2–3 minutes until noodles are tender and separated, then remove from heat,add soup base to noodles and stir.

The applicable subheading for all four instant “Ramen Noodle Soup” prod-ucts will be 1902.30.0060, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States(HTSUS), which provides for pasta, whether or not cooked or stuffed (withmeat or other substances) or otherwise prepared, such as spaghetti, maca-roni, noodles, lasagna, gnocchi, ravioli, cannelloni ... other pasta...other...other. The rate of duty will be 6.4% ad valorem.


This merchandise is subject to The Public Health Security and Bioterror-ism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002 (The Bioterrorism Act), which isregulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Information on theBioterrorism Act can be obtained by calling FDA at 301–575–0156, or at theWeb site www.fda.gov/oc/bioterrorism/bioact.html.


A copy of the ruling or the control number indicated above should beprovided with the entry documents filed at the time this merchandise isimported. If you have any questions regarding the ruling, contact NationalImport Specialist Stanley Hopard at (646) 733–3029.



DirectorNational Commodity Specialist Division


ATTACHMENT B

HQ 953104April 1, 1993

CLA-2-CO:R:C:F 953104 KCATEGORY: ClassificationTARIFF No.: 1902.30.0060

MR. KWANG SOO PAICK

K.S. TRADING CO.P.O.BOX 76214LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90076

RE: Classification of Noodles With A Soup Base

DEAR SIR:The following is in response to your request of September 4, 1992, for a

ruling concerning the classification of products referred to as “Oriental StyleInstant Noodle With Soup”. Two samples were submitted which were exam-ined and disposed of.

FACTS:

The products consist of a plastic bowl with a foil lid, containing driednoodles and a packet of a powdered soup base. The net weight is 3.03 ounces.The stated ingredients for the noodles are wheat flour, potato starch, palm oil,salt, onion paste, and corn flour. The manufacturing process of the noodlesincludes the passing of the noodles through a steam box for one and one halfminutes and partially cooking the noodles by frying them in palm oil for twominutes. The noodles are then air cooled and are packaged with a soup basedpacket which enables a consumer to make instant noodle soup by the additionof boiling hot water. One of the products contains shrimp and for purposes ofthis ruling, we assume that the quantity is not over 20 percent by weight.

ISSUE:

The issue is whether the noodles have been “cooked” and therefore classi-fiable under subheading 1902.30.0060, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of theUnited States (HTSUS).

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

Heading 1902, HTSUS, provides for pasta, whether or not cooked or stuffed(with meat or other substances) or otherwise prepared, such as ... noodles...,whether or not prepared. In Headquarters Ruling Letter (HRL) 086309,dated March 1, 1990, concerning a similar instant noodle soup, we stated thatthe mere inclusion of a sealed soup base packet in the same package as thenoodles does not constitute a preparation of the pasta for tariff purposes andthat the merchandise was classifiable as other uncooked pasta, not stuffed orotherwise prepared, other, including pasta packaged with sauce prepara-tions, in subheading 1902.19.4000, HTSUS, with duty at 10 percent advalorem. However, the merchandise in this case contains noodles that havebeen cooked or partially cooked and therefor have been prepared for tariffpurposes. Accordingly, the merchandise is this case is classifiable as otherpasta, under subheading 1902.30.0060, HTSUS, with a duty at 10 percent advalorem.


HOLDING:

Products containing dried noodles that were prepared by a cooking processand are packaged with a soup base packet that enables a consumer to makeinstant noodle soup by the addition of boiling hot water, are classifiable asother pasta under subheading 1902.30.0060, HTSUS, with duty at 10 percentad valorem.

Sincerely,JOHN DURANT,

DirectorCommercial Rulings Division


ATTACHMENT C

HQ 086309March 1, 1990

CLA-2 CO:R:C:G 086309 WAWCATEGORY: ClassificationTARIFF NO.: 1902.19.4000

MS. EVA ESSLER

SHAFFER, CLARKE & CO., INC.3 PARKLANDS DRIVE

DARIEN, CT 06820–3639

RE: Reconsideration and modification of New York Ruling Letter 843104;wonton noodles and soup base

DEAR MS. ESSLER:This letter is a reconsideration of New York Ruling Letter 843104, dated

August 1, 1989, concerning the tariff classification of wonton noodles withsoup base under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Anno-tated (HTSUSA).

The soup product is described as consisting of dried, uncooked wontonnoodles and a sealed packet that contains a soup base. The soup is preparedby adding a specified amount of boiling water to the ingredients and thensimmering the mixture for two minutes. The product is manufactured inJapan.

In New York Ruling Letter 843104, Customs classified the sample mer-chandise under subheading 1902.30.0060, HTSUSA, which provides forpasta, whether or not cooked or stuffed (with meat or other substances) orotherwise prepared, such as spaghetti, macaroni, noodles, lasagna, gnocchi,ravioli, cannelloni; couscous, whether or not prepared: other pasta: other.Items classified under this subheading are subject to a 10 percent rate ofduty.

After reexamination of Heading 1902, HTSUS and the relevant Explana-tory Notes, it is Customs position that the sample item is more properlyclassifiable under subheading 1902.19, HTSUS, rather than 1902.30,HTSUS. Subheading 1902.19, HTSUS, provides for pasta, whether or notcooked or stuffed (with meat or other substances) or otherwise prepared, suchas spaghetti, macaroni, noodles, lasagna, gnocchi, ravioli, cannelloni; cous-cous, whether or not prepared: uncooked pasta, not stuffed or otherwiseprepared. More specifically, subheading 1902.19.4000, HTSUSA, includesuncooked pasta packaged with other ingredients, provided that the pasta hasnot been otherwise prepared. The mere inclusion of a sealed soup base packetin the same package as the noodles does not constitute a “preparation” of thepasta for tariff purposes. Moreover, it is the position of the Customs Servicethat the noodle and soup base product is analogous to “pasta packaged withsauce” which is one of the exemplars noted in subheading 1902.19, HTSUS.By contrast, subheading 1902.30, HTSUS, includes cooked or otherwise pre-pared unstuffed pasta. Since the product consists of dried, uncooked wontonnoodles which have not been stuffed, classification is not appropriate undersubheading 1902.30, HTSUS.

For the foregoing reasons, the subject merchandise is properly classified insubheading 1902.19.4000, HTSUSA. Items classified under this subheading


are dutiable at 10 percent ad valorem. New York Ruling Letter 843104, datedAugust 1, 1989, is hereby modified accordingly.

Sincerely,JOHN DURANT,

DirectorCommercial Rulings Division


ATTACHMENT D

HQ H304896OT:RR:CTF:FTM H304896 TJS


MS. JESSICA ROWE

BLUE Q CORPORATION

103 HAWTHORNE AVENUE

PITTSFIELD, MA 01201

RE: Revocation of NY N125119, HQ 953104, and HQ 086309; Classification ofInstant Noodle Soup

DEAR MS. ROWE,This is to inform you that U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) has

reconsidered New York Ruling Letter (“NY”) N125119, issued to you onOctober 12, 2010, as well as Headquarters Ruling Letter (“HQ”) 953104,dated April 1, 1993, and HQ 086309, dated March 1, 1990, regarding the tariffclassification of instant noodle soup under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule ofthe United States (“HTSUS”). In those rulings, CBP classified various instantnoodle soups in heading 1902, HTSUS, as pasta. We have determined thoserulings to be in error. For the reasons set forth below, we are revoking NYN125119, HQ 953104, and HQ 086309.

FACTS:

The subject merchandise consists of various instant noodle soup productscomprised of dried noodles and soup base. NY N125119 concerned the tariffclassification of instant “Ramen Noodle Soup” from China consisting of ablock of dried noodles and a pouch of a powdered soup base available in fourdifferent flavors: Chicken, Shrimp, Spicy Beef, and Spicy Vegetable. Packageinstructions directed the user to bring two cups of cold water to a boil, insertthe noodles and cook for two to three minutes until noodles were tender andseparated, remove from heat, and then add the soup base and stir. HQ 953104concerned products referred to as “Oriental Style Instant Noodle With Soup”that consisted of a plastic bowl with a foil lid containing dried noodles and apacket of a powdered soup base, which enabled the consumer to make instantnoodle soup by adding boiling water.1 The products in NY N125119 and HQ953104 were classified in subheading 1902.30.0060, Harmonized TariffSchedule of the United States Annotated (“HTSUSA”), which provides for“Pasta, whether or not cooked or stuffed (with meat or other substances) orotherwise prepared, such as spaghetti, macaroni, noodles, lasagna, gnocchi,ravioli, cannelloni: Other pasta: Other: Other.”

The product in HQ 086309 was a soup product manufactured in Japanconsisting of dried, uncooked wonton noodles and a sealed packet of a soupbase. The consumer prepared the soup by adding a specified amount ofboiling water to the ingredients and then simmering the mixture for twominutes. HQ 086309 classified the soup product under subheading1902.19.40, HTSUS, which includes uncooked pasta packaged with other

1 One of the products in HQ 953104 contained shrimp and for purposes of the ruling, it wasassumed that the quantity was not over 20% by weight.


ingredients, provided that the pasta has not been otherwise prepared.2 CBPheld that the mere inclusion of a sealed soup base packet in the same packageas the noodles did not constitute a “preparation” of the pasta for classificationpurposes and that the noodle and soup base product was analogous to “pastapackaged with sauce,” which is one of the exemplars noted in subheading1902.19, HTSUS.

ISSUE:

Whether the subject merchandise is classified in heading 1902, HTSUS,which provides for pasta, or in heading 2104, HTSUS, which provides forsoup.

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

Classification under the HTSUS is made in accordance with the GeneralRules of Interpretation (“GRI”). GRI 1 provides that the classification of goodsshall be “determined according to the terms of the headings and any relativesection or chapter notes.” In the event that the goods cannot be classifiedsolely on the basis of GRI 1, and if the headings and legal notes do nototherwise require, the remaining GRIs may be applied in order.

The following HTSUS headings are under consideration:1902: Pasta, whether or not cooked or stuffed (with meat or other sub-

stances) or otherwise prepared, such as spaghetti, macaroni,noodles, lasagna, gnocchi, ravioli, cannelloni; couscous, whetheror not prepared

2104: Soups and broths and preparations therefor; homogenized com-posite food preparations

* * *The Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System Explanatory

Notes (“ENs”) constitute the official interpretation of the Harmonized Sys-tem. While not legally binding nor dispositive, the ENs provide a commentaryon the scope of each heading of the Harmonized System and are thus usefulin ascertaining the proper classification of merchandise. It is CBP’s practiceto follow, whenever possible, the terms of the ENs when interpreting theHTSUS. See T.D. 89–90, 54 Fed. Reg. 35127 (Aug. 23, 1989).

EN 19.02 provides, in relevant part, the following:The heading does not cover:

(b) Soups and broths and preparations therefor, containing pasta (head-ing 21.04).

* * *EN 21.04 provides, in pertinent part, the following:

(A) SOUPS AND BROTHS AND PREPARATIONS THEREFORThis category includes:

(1) Preparations for soups or broths requiring only the addition of water,milk, etc.

(2) Soups and broths ready for consumption after heating.

2 HQ 086309 modified NY 843104, dated August 1, 1989, which classified the wonton soupunder subheading 1902.30.0060, HTSUSA.


These products are generally based on vegetable products (vegetables,flour, starches, tapioca, pasta, rice, plant extracts, etc.), meat, meat ex-tracts, fat, fish, crustaceans, molluscs or other aquatic invertebrates,peptones, amino-acids or yeast extract. They may also contain a consid-erable proportion of salt.

They are generally put up as tablets, cakes, cubes, or in powder or liquidform.

* * *Heading 2104, HTSUS, is the provision for “soups and broths and prepa-

rations therefor.” There are no definitions for the terms “soup”, “broth”, and“preparation” in the HTSUS. Merriam-Webster dictionary defines “soup” as“a liquid food especially with a meat, fish, or vegetable stock as a base andoften containing pieces of solid food.”3 With the addition of boiling water, thepowdered soup base becomes a flavored broth containing noodles–fallingwithin the definition of “soup.” The noodles in the products at issue aretypically used in soups, as indicated by their definitions. Merriam-Websterdictionary defines “ramen” as “quick-cooking egg noodles usually served in abroth with bits of meat and vegetables.”4 “Wonton” is defined as “a Chinesefood made of dough that is filled with meat or vegetables and often servedboiled in soup.”5 These definitions, coupled with the fact that the subjectproducts include soup base, support the classification of the subject productsas preparations for soup. Moreover, “Ramen Noodle Soup” and “OrientalStyle Instant Noodle With Soup” are sold and identified as soups. Thesedefinitions, coupled with the fact that the subject products include soup base,support the classification of the subject products as preparations for soup.Moreover, “Ramen Noodle Soup” and “Oriental Style Instant Noodle WithSoup” are sold and identified as soups.

In HQ 963821, dated July 17, 2000, CBP classified “Milk Peanut Soup”under heading 2008, HTSUS, as prepared peanuts, rather than heading2104, HTSUS. In making its determination, CBP considered the product’scontents, noting that the high sugar content and the lack of stock indicatedthat the product was actually a snack or dessert rather than a soup. CBP alsoconsidered the fact that the “Milk Peanut Soup” was intended to be consumeddirectly from its tin can container, rather than a bowl. Here, the subjectmerchandise differs from the “Milk Peanut Soup” primarily in its contentsand preparation. The noodle soup products at issue consist of two primaryingredients: soup base and noodles. The powdered soup base becomes soupstock with the addition of water, and is itself classifiable in heading 2104,HTSUS, as a soup preparation. See HQ 962908 (Dec. 23, 1999) (classifyingunder subheading 2104.10.0020, HTSUSA, two types of dried soup stocks towhich the consumer adds hot water for a soup or a soup base). The inclusion

3 Merriam-Webster Dictionary, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/soup (last ac-cessed Nov. 7, 2019).4 Merriam-Webster Dictionary, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ramen (lastaccessed Nov. 7, 2019); See also Lexico, https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/ramen (defin-ing “ramen” as “quick-cooking noodles, typically served in a broth with meat and veg-etables) (last accessed Nov. 7, 2019).5 Merriam-Webster Dictionary, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/wonton (lastaccessed Nov. 7, 2019); See also Lexico, https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/wonton (defin-ing “wonton” as “a small round dumpling or roll with a savoury filling, usually eaten boiledin soup”) (last accessed Nov. 7, 2019).


of the soup base and required addition of water indicate that the subjectproducts are soups. Additionally, the “Oriental Style Instant Noodle WithSoup” in HQ 953104 was packaged in a plastic bowl with a foil lid, allowingthe consumer to prepare and consume the product directly from the con-tainer. The bowl container in HQ 953104 is unlike the tin can container in HQ963821 because soups are typically served in bowls.

In NY N043855, dated December 10, 2008, CBP addressed the classifica-tion of “Chicken Noodle Soup,” which was a dry mix composed of approxi-mately 44% small egg-pasta shells, 36% seasoning, 18% vegetable blend, and3% green peas. The product was mixed with water, supplemented withchicken, and heated to make the soup. CBP classified the “Chicken NoodleSoup” mix under subheading 2104.10.0020, HTSUSA, as a dried preparationfor soup.

We find that the instant rulings are similar to NY N043855 where, despiteconsisting primarily of noodles/pasta upon importation, the products onlyrequire the addition of water to make soup. According to EN 21.04(A)(1),heading 2104, HTSUS, includes preparations for soups requiring only theaddition of water. Each of the subject products instructs the user to addboiling water to the noodles and soup base to prepare the dish. Additionally,the soup base distinguishes the product as soup rather than a noodle dish.The subject merchandise would consist solely of noodles but for the soup base.It is the soup base that provides the flavor and serves as the foundation of thedish. The inclusion of the soup base implies that the product is intended as asoup rather than a pasta dish.6 EN 19.02 excludes soup preparations con-taining pasta from classification in heading 1902, HTSUS, and in fact, directsclassification of such products in heading 2104, HTSUS. Because the prod-ucts at issue are soup preparations that contain noodles, they are precludedfrom classification in heading 1902, HTSUS.

As such, the subject instant noodle soup products, are classified as souppreparations in heading 2104, HTSUS. They are specifically classified insubheading 2104.10.0020, HTSUSA, which provides for “Soups and brothsand preparations therefor; homogenized composite food preparations: Soupsand broths and preparations therefor: Dried.”

HOLDING:

By application of GRI 1, the instant noodle soup products are classified inheading 2104, HTSUS, specifically under subheading 2104.10.0020,HTSUSA, which provides for “Soups and broths and preparations therefor;homogenized composite food preparations: Soups and broths and prepara-tions therefor: Dried.” The 2019 column one duty rate is 3.2% ad valorem.

6 In NY N204353, dated March 15, 2012, CBP addressed the classification of Indomie®Instant Noodles Chicken Flavor, which consisted of flat, dried, pre-cooked noodles and asealed packet with two compartments containing chili powder and seasoning powder,packed in a sealed, retail pouch. The package contained two sets of instructions: one set forpreparing the noodles as a noodle dish, and another instructing the user to prepare thenoodles with additional water for “soup style.” CBP classified the instant noodles in sub-heading 1902.30.0060, HTSUSA, as pasta. We do not dispute this classification because thenoodles are prepared either as a noodle dish or in a “soup style.” Additionally, it does notappear the noodles were marketed as soup and the seasoning packet is not referred to as“soup base.”


Duty rates are provided for convenience and are subject to change. The textof the most recent HTSUS and the accompanying duty rates are provided athttps://hts.usitc.gov/current.


NY N125119, dated October 12, 2010, HQ 953104, dated April 1, 1993, andHQ 086309, dated March 1, 1990 are hereby REVOKED in accordance withthe above analysis.

In accordance with 19 U.S.C. § 1625(c), this ruling will become effective 60days after its publication in the Customs Bulletin.



◆

PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF ONE RULING LETTERAND REVOCATION OF TREATMENT RELATING TO THE

TARIFF CLASSIFICATION OF A DOCUMENT HOLDERWITH NOTE PAD


ACTION: Notice of proposed modification of one ruling letter andrevocation of treatment relating to the tariff classification of a docu-ment holder with note pad.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 625(c), Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C.§1625(c)), as amended by section 623 of title VI (Customs Modern-ization) of the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementa-tion Act (Pub. L. 103–182, 107 Stat. 2057), this notice advises inter-ested parties that U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) intendsto modify one ruling letter concerning tariff classification of a docu-ment holder with note pad under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule ofthe United States (HTSUS). Similarly, CBP intends to revoke anytreatment previously accorded by CBP to substantially identicaltransactions. Comments on the correctness of the proposed actionsare invited.

DATE: omments must be received on or before January 31, 2020.

ADDRESS: Written comments are to be addressed to U.S.Customs and Border Protection, Office of Trade, Regulations andRulings, Attention: Trade and Commercial Regulations Branch, 90K St., NE, 10th Floor, Washington, DC 20229–1177. Submittedcomments may be inspected at the address stated above during


regular business hours. Arrangements to inspect submittedcomments should be made in advance by calling Mr. Joseph Clarkat (202) 325–0118.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lindsay Heebner,Chemicals, Petroleum, Metals, and Miscellaneous Articles Branch,Regulations and Rulings, Office of Trade, at (202) 325–0266.


BACKGROUND


Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. §1625(c)(1), this notice advises interestedparties that CBP is proposing to modify one ruling letter pertaining tothe tariff classification of a document holder with note pad. Althoughin this notice, CBP is specifically referring to New York Ruling Letter(“NY”) N069095, dated August 19, 2009 (Attachment A), this noticealso covers any rulings on this merchandise which may exist, buthave not been specifically identified. CBP has undertaken reasonableefforts to search existing databases for rulings in addition to the oneidentified. No further rulings have been found. Any party who hasreceived an interpretive ruling or decision (i.e., a ruling letter, inter-nal advice memorandum or decision, or protest review decision) onthe merchandise subject to this notice should advise CBP during thecomment period.



In NY N069095, CBP classified a document holder with note pad inheading 4202, HTSUS, specifically in subheading 4202.12.81701,HTSUS, which provides for “Trunks, suitcases, vanity cases, attachecases, briefcases, school satchels, spectacle cases, binocular cases,camera cases, musical instrument cases, gun cases, holsters andsimilar containers; traveling bags, insulated food or beverage bags,toiletry bags, knapsacks and backpacks, handbags, shopping bags,wallets, purses, map cases, cigarette cases, tobacco pouches, toolbags, sports bags, bottle cases, jewelry boxes, powder cases, cutlerycases and similar containers, of leather or of composition leather, ofsheeting of plastics, of textile materials, of vulcanized fiber or ofpaperboard, or wholly or mainly covered with such materials or withpaper: Trunks, suitcases, vanity cases, attache cases, briefcases,school satchels and similar containers: With outer surface of plasticsor of textile materials: Of man-made fibers: Other.” CBP has reviewedNY N069095 and has determined the ruling letter to be in error. It isnow CBP’s position that the document holder with note pad is prop-erly classified, in heading 4820, HTSUS, specifically in subheading4820.10.2040, HTSUS, which provides for “Registers, account books,notebooks, order books, receipt books, letter pads, memorandumpads, diaries and similar articles, exercise books, blotting pads, bind-ers (looseleaf or other), folders, file covers, manifold business forms,interleaved carbon sets and other articles of stationery, of paper orpaperboard; albums for samples or for collections and book covers(including cover boards and book jackets) of paper or paperboard:Registers, account books, notebooks, order books, receipt books, letterpads, memorandum pads, diaries and similar articles: Diaries, note-books and address books, bound; memorandum pads, letter pads andsimilar articles: Other note books with dimensions of 152.4–381 mm(6″ - 15″), inclusive (small side) X 222.5–381 mm (8.75″ -15″), inclu-sive (large side).”

Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. §1625(c)(1), CBP is proposing to modify NYN069095 and to revoke or modify any other ruling not specificallyidentified to reflect the analysis contained in the proposed Headquar-ters Ruling Letter (“HQ”) H188455, set forth as Attachment B to thisnotice. Additionally, pursuant to 19 U.S.C. §1625(c)(2), CBP is pro-posing to revoke any treatment previously accorded by CBP to sub-stantially identical transactions.


1 2009 HTSUS subheading 4202.12.8030.


Dated: December 11, 2019ALLYSON R. MATTANAH

forMYLES B. HARMON,


Attachments


ATTACHMENT A

N069095August 19, 2009

CLA-2–42:OT:RR:NC:N4:441CATEGORY: Classification

TARIFF NO.: 4202.12.8030, 4202.32.9550LISA GINGERICH

COPPERSMITH INC.760 BONNIE LANE

ELK GROVE VILLAGE, IL 60007

RE: The tariff classification of expandable document organizers and couponholders from China

DEAR MS. GINGERICH:In your letter dated June 24, 2009, you requested a tariff classification

ruling. Your samples will be returned to you.Style 98735 and 95835 are expandable document organizers constructed

with an outer surface of man-made textile material. Both styles are a form ofa portfolio. Each is made up to provide storage, protection, portability andorganization to documents and other such items as catalog pages, etc., as wellas accessories. Each organizer features an open pocket with a retractablepaper notepad and thirteen semi-translucent plastic expandable sleeve di-viders with tab holders to identify document contents. Style 95835 has azipper closure along three sides. Style 98735 has a flap with a magneticclosure. Both measure approximately 11.5” (W) x 14” (L) x 1.5” (D).

Styles 98630 and 98631 are accordion style coupon holders designed toorganize and store coupons. They are constructed with an outer surface ofman-made textile material. Both are made up to provide storage, protection,portability and organization to coupons or other small documents. Eachholder features an open pocket with a retractable paper notepad and thirteensemi-translucent plastic expandable sleeve dividers with tab holders to iden-tify the contents. Style 98630 has a flap with a metal twist lock closure. Style98631 has a zipper closure along three sides. Both measure approximately5.5” (W) x 8” (L) x 1.5” (D).

In your letter, you suggest all four samples should be classified under4820.10.2020, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS),which provides for registers, account books, notebooks . . . and similar ar-ticles: diaries, notebooks and address books, bound memorandum pads, letterpads and similar articles: memorandum pads, letter pads and similar ar-ticles. Each expandable document organizer is clearly designed to organize,store, protect and carry documents. The translucent plastic expandablesleeve dividers aid in the organization, storage and protection of documents.The expandable document organizers share the essential characteristics, aswell as the specific and primary purpose of the exemplars of heading 4202,HTSUS. The organizers are, therefore, classified under an ejusdem generisanalysis, as a “similar container,” in heading 4202, HTSUS.

The applicable subheading for styles 98735 and 95835 will be4202.12.8030, HTSUS, which provides for attaché cases, briefcases, schoolsatchels, occupational luggage cases and similar containers, with outer sur-face of textile materials, other of man-made fibers. The duty rate will be17.6% ad valorem.


The applicable subheading for styles 98630 and 98631 will be4202.32.9550, HTSUS, which provides for articles of a kind normally carriedin the pocket or in the handbag, with outer surface of textile materials, other,of man-made fibers. The duty rate will be 17.6 percent ad valorem.



A copy of the ruling or the control number indicated above should beprovided with the entry documents filed at the time this merchandise isimported. If you have any questions regarding the ruling, contact NationalImport Specialist Vikki Lazaro at (646) 733–3041.


DirectorNational Commodity Specialist Division


ATTACHMENT B

HQ H188455OT:RR:CTF:CPMM:LMH


LISA GINGERICH

COPPERSMITH INC.760 BONNIE LANE

ELK GROVE VILLAGE, IL 60007

RE: Modification of NY N069095. Tariff classification of certain documentholders with notepads.

DEAR LISA GINGERICH,U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued you New York Ruling

Letter (NY) N069095, dated August 19, 2009. That ruling pertains to thetariff classification under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the UnitedStates, (HTSUS) of a document holder with a notepad and an accordion stylecoupon holder. We have since reviewed this ruling and find it to be in errorwith respect to the document holder with notepad, which is described indetail herein.

FACTS:

NY N069095 states the following, in relevant part:Style 98735 and 95835 are expandable document organizers constructedwith an outer surface of man-made textile material. Both styles are aform of a portfolio. Each is made up to provide storage, protection, por-tability and organization to documents and other such items as catalogpages, etc., as well as accessories. Each organizer features an open pocketwith a retractable paper notepad and thirteen semi-translucent plasticexpandable sleeve dividers with tab holders to identify document con-tents. Style 95835 has a zipper closure along three sides. Style 98735 hasa flap with a magnetic closure. Both measure approximately 11.5” (W) x14” (L) x 1.5” (D).

ISSUE:

Whether the document holder with notepad is classified as a container ofheading 4202, HTSUS, or a notebook, memorandum pad, or letter pad ofheading 4820, HTSUS.

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

Classification under the HTSUS is made in accordance with the GeneralRules of Interpretation (GRIs). GRI 1 provides that the classification of goodsshall be determined according to the terms of the headings of the tariffschedule and any relative section or chapter notes. In the event that thegoods cannot be classified solely on the basis of GRI 1, and if the headings andlegal notes do not otherwise require, the remaining GRIs 2 through 6 maythen be applied in order.

The HTSUS provisions under consideration in this case are as follows:


4202 Trunks, suitcases, vanity cases, attache cases, briefcases, schoolsatchels, spectacle cases, binocular cases, camera cases, musicalinstrument cases, gun cases, holsters and similar containers; trav-eling bags, insulated food or beverage bags, toiletry bags, knap-sacks and backpacks, handbags, shopping bags, wallets, purses,map cases, cigarette cases, tobacco pouches, tool bags, sports bags,bottle cases, jewelry boxes, powder cases, cutlery cases and similarcontainers, of leather or of composition leather, of sheeting of plas-tics, of textile materials, of vulcanized fiber or of paperboard, orwholly or mainly covered with such materials or with paper:

Trunks, suitcases, vanity cases, attache cases, briefcases,school satchels and similar containers:

4202.12 With outer surface of plastics or of textile materials:

With outer surface of textile materials:

4202.12.81 Of man-made fibers:

4202.12.8170 Other.

***

4820 Registers, account books, notebooks, order books, receipt books,letter pads, memorandum pads, diaries and similar articles, exer-cise books, blotting pads, binders (looseleaf or other), folders, filecovers, manifold business forms, interleaved carbon sets and otherarticles of stationery, of paper or paperboard; albums for samplesor for collections and book covers (including cover boards and bookjackets) of paper or paperboard:

4820.10 Registers, account books, notebooks, order books, receiptbooks, letter pads, memorandum pads, diaries and similararticles:

4820.10.20 Diaries, notebooks and address books, bound; memo-randum pads, letter pads and similar articles:

4820.10.2040 Other note books with dimensions of 152.4–381mm (6″ 15”), inclusive (small side) X 222.5–381mm (8.75” -15”), inclusive (large side).

In understanding the language of the HTSUS, the Explanatory Notes(ENs) of the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System, whichconstitute the official interpretation of the HTSUS at the international level,may be utilized. The ENs, although not dispositive or legally binding, providea commentary on the scope of each heading, and are generally indicative ofthe proper interpretation of the HTSUS.2

The EN to GRI 3(b) states:The factor which determines essential character will vary as betweendifferent kinds of goods. It may, for example, be determined by the natureof the material or component, its bulk, quantity, weight or value, or by therole of a constituent material in relation to the use of the goods.

Applying the GRIs and analyzing the headings and related section andchapter notes, we note that this product is a composite good with a man-madetextile cover, plastic expandable sleeve dividers, and a paper letter pad. Assuch, GRIs 1 and 2 are not sufficient to classify the product because it couldfall under multiple provisions. In addition, the binder is made of variousmaterials, eliminating the possibility of classification by material alone.Under GRI 3(a), the container and letter pad refer only to part of the com-

2 See T.D. 89–80, 54 Fed. Reg. 35127 (August 23, 1989).


posite product and are considered equally specific. As a result, we move toGRI 3(b) to determine the essential character of the product.

The Explanatory Note to GRI 3(b) states, “the factor which determinesessential character will vary as between different kinds of goods. It may, forexample, be determined by the nature of the material or component, its bulk,quantity, weight or value, or by the role of a constituent material in relationto the use of the goods.”3 The courts have found that the “essential character”of an article is “that which is indispensable to the structure, core or conditionof the article, i.e., what it is.”4 Further, “the existence of other materialswhich impart something to the article ought not to preclude an attempt toisolate the most outstanding and distinctive characteristic of the article. . . .”5 The courts make clear that determining the essential character of anarticle requires a fact-intensive analysis.6

In this case, the letter pad or notebook accounts for the bulk of the weightof the product, while the textile outer portion comprises more value than anyother individual material in the good. However, the role of the notepad inrelation to the use of the good is paramount in that the pockets, plasticsleeves and cover facilitate the ability to keep and carry notes written on thepad or in the notebook.

The above analysis is in accordance with court precedent. Specifically, theCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit evaluated a similar product in Aves.in Leather, Inc. v. United States. The product was described as:

...Calcu-Folios measure approximately 13.5 inches tall by 11.5 incheswide by 1.5 inches deep when closed, are zippered on three sides with aninterior sleeve, possess one exterior open flat pocket and a number ofsmall interior pockets, have a padded carrying handle fitted to the exte-rior spine, are constructed of paperboard covered with plastic foam and avinyl/plastic exterior and interior, contain a solar-powered calculator, andhave an interior three-ring metal binder permanently affixed to thespine.7

In that case, the Court considered whether the Calcu-Folios were properlyclassified under heading 4802 or 4202 and concluded:

Here, while the Calcu-Folios may be used to organize and protect smalland/or flat items in addition to a writing pad, they have an internalcapacity of only 1 inch and lack significant carrying space. These charac-teristics make them unsuitable to carry newspapers, books, and otherobjects that are normally carried in containers that are common to Head-ing 4202. Moreover, while the articles in question may be generallydescribed as “containers,” their specific use is limited to facilitation intaking of notes as well as aiding in the organization of print and other

3 EN to Rule 3(b), (VIII).4 See United China & Glass Co. v. United States, 61 Cust. Ct. 386, C.D. 3637, 293 F. Supp.734, 737, (1968).5 Canadian Vinyl Indus., Inc. v. United States, 76 Cust. Ct. 1, 3, C.D. 4626 408 F. Supp.1377, 1378 (1976).6 See Toy Biz, Inc. v. United States, 219 F. Supp. 2d 1289, 1301 (CIT 2002).7 423 F.3d 1326 (Fed. Cir. 2005) at 1328.


visual flat materials. Such a specific use, which predominates over themore general description of containers, precludes classification of theCalcu-Folios under Heading 4202.8

As with the case above, the instant product has slim pockets to hold printand other visual flat materials and is used to facilitate notetaking. The morespecific use of notetaking predominates over the general description as acontainer. In Headquarters Ruling Letter (HQ) 967816, we followed thedecision in Aves. in Leather, classifying a folio filer with memorandum pad orspiral notebook under heading 4820, HTSUS. The merchandise in that rulingwas described as follows:

[The Big Mouth Folio is] made of translucent polypropylene sheeting thathas been scored, folded, heat-sealed and spot bonded to form a bifold casewith a flap closure. The inner left side of the folder contains an accordionpouch fitted with five tabbed plastic folders. This side measures approxi-mately 13” high by 10” wide. A bungee stretches over a plastic button rivetto secure the folders. The inner right side of the folder incorporates ahorizontal slit into which a legal size paper pad has been inserted. Thisside also measures approximately 13” high by 10” wide. When in closedposition, the Big Mouth Folio measures approximately 13” high, 11” wide,and 1–1/8” thick.

We found that the article’s use was centered on the memorandum pad ofheading 4820 and the other features served merely to enhance the ability toprovide a convenient and organized method by which to take notes. See alsoNew York Ruling Letter (NY) N031216, dated July 10, 2008. Because theessential character of the instant document holder with notepad is the note-pad, it is classified via GRIs 1 and 3(b), under heading 4820 as a notebook orletter pad in accordance with Aves. In Leather and the above cited rulings.

HOLDING:

By application of GRIs 1 and 3(b), the subject document holder withnotepad is classified in heading 4820, HTSUS. It is specifically provided for insubheading 4820.10.2040, HTSUS, which provides for, “Registers, accountbooks, notebooks, order books, receipt books, letter pads, memorandum pads,diaries and similar articles, exercise books, blotting pads, binders (looseleafor other), folders, file covers, manifold business forms, interleaved carbon setsand other articles of stationery, of paper or paperboard; albums for samplesor for collections and book covers (including cover boards and book jackets) ofpaper or paperboard: Registers, account books, notebooks, order books, re-ceipt books, letter pads, memorandum pads, diaries and similar articles:Diaries, notebooks and address books, bound; memorandum pads, letter padsand similar articles: Other note books with dimensions of 152.4–381 mm (6”- 15”), inclusive (small side) X 222.5–381 mm (8.75” -15”), inclusive (largeside).” The 2019 column one general rate of duty is free.

Duty rates are provided for your convenience and subject to change. Thetext of the most recent HTSUS and the accompanying duty rates are providedat www.usitc.gov.

8 Id. at 1333.



NY N069095, dated August 19, 2009, with respect to the document holderwith notepad is hereby MODIFIED.



◆

AGENCY INFORMATION COLLECTION ACTIVITIES:

Record of Vessel Foreign Repair or Equipment Purchase

AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Departmentof Homeland Security.

ACTION: 60-Day notice and request for comments; extension of anexisting collection of information.

SUMMARY: The Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Customsand Border Protection will be submitting the following informationcollection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) forreview and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Actof 1995 (PRA). The information collection is published in the FederalRegister to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies.Comments are encouraged and must be submitted (no later thanFebruary 11, 2020) to be assured of consideration.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and/or suggestions regarding theitem(s) contained in this notice must include the OMB Control Num-ber 1651–0027 in the subject line and the agency name. To avoidduplicate submissions, please use only one of the following methods tosubmit comments:

(1) Email. Submit comments to: [email protected].(2) Mail. Submit written comments to CBP Paperwork Reduction

Act Officer, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Office of Trade,Regulations and Rulings, Economic Impact Analysis Branch, 90 KStreet NE, 10th Floor, Washington, DC 20229–1177.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for addi-tional PRA information should be directed to Seth Renkema, Chief,Economic Impact Analysis Branch, U.S. Customs and BorderProtection, Office of Trade, Regulations and Rulings, 90 K Street NE,10th Floor, Washington, DC 20229–1177, Telephone number202–325–0056 or via email [email protected]. Please note thatthe contact information provided here is solely for questions regard-


ing this notice. Individuals seeking information about other CBPprograms should contact the CBP National Customer Service Centerat 877–227–5511, (TTY) 1–800–877–8339, or CBP website at https://www.cbp.gov/.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: CBP invites the generalpublic and other Federal agencies to comment on the proposed and/orcontinuing information collections pursuant to the Paperwork Reduc-tion Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This process is conducted inaccordance with 5 CFR 1320.8. Written comments and suggestionsfrom the public and affected agencies should address one or more ofthe following four points: (1) Whether the proposed collection of in-formation is necessary for the proper performance of the functions ofthe agency, including whether the information will have practicalutility; (2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of theproposed collection of information, including the validity of the meth-odology and assumptions used; (3) suggestions to enhance the quality,utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) sugges-tions to minimize the burden of the collection of information on thosewho are to respond, including through the use of appropriate auto-mated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection tech-niques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting elec-tronic submission of responses. The comments that are submittedwill be summarized and included in the request for approval. Allcomments will become a matter of public record.

Overview of This Information Collection

Title: Record of Vessel Foreign Repair or Equipment Purchase.OMB Number: 1651–0027.Form Number: CBP Form 226.Abstract: 19 U.S.C. 1466(a) provides for a 50 percent advalorem duty assessed on a vessel master or owner for anyrepairs, purchases, or expenses incurred in a foreign country by acommercial vessel documented under the laws of the UnitedStates. CBP Form 226, Record of Vessel Foreign Repair orEquipment Purchase, is used by the master or owner of a vesselto declare and file entry on equipment, repairs, parts, ormaterials purchased for the vessel in a foreign country. Thisinformation enables CBP to assess duties on these foreignrepairs, parts, or materials. CBP Form 226 is provided forby 19 CFR 4.7 and 4.14 and is accessible at: https://www.cbp.gov/document/forms/form-226-record-vessel-foreign-repair-or-equipment-purchase.


Current Actions: This submission is being made to extend theexpiration date with no change to the burden hours or to theinformation collected on Form 226.Type of Review: Extension (without change).Affected Public: Businesses.Estimated Number of Respondents: 100.Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 11.Estimated Number of Total Annual Responses: 1,100.Estimated Time per Response: 2 hours.Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 2,200.

Dated: December 10, 2019.SETH D. RENKEMA,

Branch Chief,Economic Impact Analysis Branch,

U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

[Published in the Federal Register, December 13, 2019 (84 FR 68181)]

◆

AGENCY INFORMATION COLLECTION ACTIVITIES:

NAFTA Regulations and Certificate of Origin

AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Departmentof Homeland Security.

ACTION: 60-Day notice and request for comments; extension of anexisting collection of information.

SUMMARY: The Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Customsand Border Protection will be submitting the following informationcollection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) forreview and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Actof 1995 (PRA). The information collection is published in the FederalRegister to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies.Comments are encouraged and must be submitted (no later thanFebruary 11, 2020) to be assured of consideration.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and/or suggestions regarding theitem(s) contained in this notice must include the OMB Control Num-ber 1651–0098 in the subject line and the agency name. To avoidduplicate submissions, please use only one of the following methods tosubmit comments:

(1) Email. Submit comments to: [email protected].(2) Mail. Submit written comments to CBP Paperwork Reduction

Act Officer, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Office of Trade,


Regulations and Rulings, Economic Impact Analysis Branch, 90 KStreet NE, 10th Floor, Washington, DC 20229–1177.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for addi-tional PRA information should be directed to Seth Renkema, Chief,Economic Impact Analysis Branch, U.S. Customs and Border Protec-tion, Office of Trade, Regulations and Rulings, 90 K Street NE, 10thFloor, Washington, DC 20229–1177, Telephone number202–325–0056 or via email [email protected]. Please note thatthe contact information provided here is solely for questions regard-ing this notice. Individuals seeking information about other CBPprograms should contact the CBP National Customer Service Centerat 877–227–5511, (TTY) 1–800–877–8339, or CBP website at https://www.cbp.gov/.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: CBP invites the generalpublic and other Federal agencies to comment on the proposed and/orcontinuing information collections pursuant to the Paperwork Reduc-tion Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This process is conducted inaccordance with 5 CFR 1320.8. Written comments and suggestionsfrom the public and affected agencies should address one or more ofthe following four points: (1) Whether the proposed collection of in-formation is necessary for the proper performance of the functions ofthe agency, including whether the information will have practicalutility; (2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of theproposed collection of information, including the validity of the meth-odology and assumptions used; (3) suggestions to enhance the quality,utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) sugges-tions to minimize the burden of the collection of information on thosewho are to respond, including through the use of appropriate auto-mated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection tech-niques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting elec-tronic submission of responses. The comments that are submittedwill be summarized and included in the request for approval. Allcomments will become a matter of public record.

Overview of This Information Collection

Title: NAFTA Regulations and Certificate of Origin.OMB Number: 1651–0098.Form Number: CBP Forms 434, 446, and 447.Abstract: On December 17, 1992, the U.S., Mexico and Canadaentered into an agreement, ‘‘the North American Free TradeAgreement’’ (NAFTA). The provisions of NAFTA were adopted by


the U.S. with the enactment of the North American Free TradeAgreement Implementation Act. Public Law 103–182, 107 Stat.2057 (1993).CBP Form 434, North American Free Trade Agreement Certificate of

Origin, is used to certify that a good being exported either from theUnited States into Canada or Mexico or from Canada or Mexico intothe United States qualifies as an originating good for purposes ofpreferential tariff treatment under NAFTA. This form is completed byexporters and/or producers and furnished to CBP upon request. CBPForm 434 is provided for by 19 CFR 181.11, 181.22 and is accessibleat: https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/publications/forms.

CBP Form 446, NAFTA Verification of Origin Questionnaire, is aquestionnaire that CBP personnel use to gather sufficient informa-tion from exporters and/or producers to determine whether goodsimported into the United States qualify as originating goods for thepurposes of preferential tariff treatment under NAFTA as stated onthe Certificate of Origin pertaining to the good. CBP Form 446 isprovided for by 19 CFR 181.72 and is accessible at: https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/publications/forms.

CBP Form 447, North American Free Trade Agreement Motor Ve-hicle Averaging Election, is used to gather information required by 19CFR 181 Appendix § 11(2). This form is provided to CBP when amanufacturer chooses to average motor vehicles for the purpose ofobtaining NAFTA preference. CBP Form 447 is accessible at: https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/publications/forms.

Current Actions: This submission is being made to extend theexpiration dates for CBP Forms 434, 446, and 447 with no changeto the estimated burden hours or to the information collected.Type of Review: Extension (without change).Affected Public: Businesses.

Form 434, NAFTA Certificate of Origin

Estimated Number of Respondents: 40,000.Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 3.Estimated Total Number of Responses: 120,000.Estimated Time per Response: 2 hours.Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 240,000.

Form 446, NAFTA Questionnaire

Estimated Number of Respondents: 400.Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.Estimated Total Number of Responses: 400.


Estimated Time per Response: 2 hours.Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 800.

Form 447, NAFTA Motor Vehicle Averaging Election

Estimated Number of Respondents: 11.Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.28.Estimated Time per Response: 1 hour.Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 14.

Dated: December 10, 2019.SETH D. RENKEMA,

Branch Chief,Economic Impact Analysis Branch,

U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

[Published in the Federal Register, December 13, 2019 (84 FR 68180)]


u.s. customs and border protection · 2020. 1. 8. · the buzz group llc (buzz group), u.s. customs...

Documents